Single Molecule Images: IBM Scientists Capture Photographs Showing Chemical Bonds [Archive]

Richard Amiel McGough

09-15-2012, 10:27 PM

This is a fascinating breakthrough that shows the actual structure of molecules:

Single Molecule Images: IBM Scientists Capture Closest Photographs Showing Chemical Bonds
(http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/09/15/single-molecule-images-ibm-chemical-bonds_n_1884818.html)

A team of IBM scientists--known for capturing the first close-up image of a single molecule (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/8225491.stm) in 2009--now have revealed incredibly detailed microscopic images that show the individual chemical bonds between atoms.

How did they get such remarkable close-ups? Using an atomic force microscope, the scientists were able to capture two images, using two different contrast mechanisms. These images not only illustrate the structure of individual nanographene molecules but also how atoms are bound together.

The research, which published in the Sept. 14 issue of Science magazine (http://www.sciencemag.org/content/337/6100/1326), is significant in furthering the study of graphene (http://www.zdnet.com/the-10-strangest-facts-about-graphene-3040093050/) devices, which could potentially be used to replace existing technologies like microchips (http://www.slashgear.com/ibm-scientists-first-to-differentiate-the-chemical-bonds-in-individual-molecules-using-afm-14247569/). The findings may also contribute to research tracking the paths of electrons during chemical reactions (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-19584301).

"We found two different contrast mechanisms to distinguish bonds. The first one is based on small differences in the force measured above the bonds," IBM scientist Leo Gross said in a written statement (http://www-03.ibm.com/press/us/en/pressrelease/38856.wss). "The second contrast mechanism really came as a surprise: Bonds appeared with different lengths in AFM measurements. With the help of ab initio calculations we found that the tilting of the carbon monoxide molecule at the tip apex is the cause of this contrast."

Chris Ellsworth

09-18-2012, 01:51 PM

http://img.techpowerup.org/120916/Crop_Circle,_Spinning_Star,_Wiltshire,_England.jpg

I think that was taken in 2008, I don't see much difference.

Richard Amiel McGough

09-18-2012, 08:56 PM

I think that was taken in 2008, I don't see much difference.
That's a pretty cool pic. Those crop circle folks really put their heart and soul into their art.

weeder

09-19-2012, 12:13 AM

sylvius

09-19-2012, 01:58 AM

weeder

09-19-2012, 02:30 AM

This reminds me of the structure of a single snowflake...such beauty falls to the ground in their millions totally unnoticed.

http://www.its.caltech.edu/~atomic/snowcrystals/photos/photos.htm

sylvius

09-19-2012, 02:56 AM

This reminds me of the structure of a single snowflake...such beauty falls to the ground in their millions totally unnoticed.

http://www.its.caltech.edu/~atomic/snowcrystals/photos/photos.htm

Isaiah 1:18,
. Come now, let us debate, says the Lord. If your sins prove to be like crimson, they will become white as snow; if they prove to be as red as crimson dye, they shall become as wool.

Rashi:

Come now, let us debate: together, I and you, and we will know who offended whom, and if you offended Me, I still give you hope to repent.

If your sins prove to be like crimson: Stained before Me like crimson red, I will make them as white as snow.

says the Lord: [The verb is in the future form to denote that] He always says this to you, like: (Num. 9: 20) â€œBy the word of the Lord they would camp (יַחֲנוּ) ,â€ also a future form. Another explanation is: Come now, let us debate. What is written above this? â€œCease to do evil; learn to do good.â€ And after you return to Me, come now, and let us debate together, to notify Me, â€œWe have done what is incumbent upon us; You do what is incumbent upon You;â€ and I say, â€œIf your sins prove to be like crimson, they will become white as snowâ€¦â€

as crimson dye: Heb. תּוֹלָע, lit. a worm. Dye with which they dye fabrics red. They are kernels, each one of which has a worm inside it. Hence the name תּוֹלָע.

snow = שֶּׁלֶג. in numbers 300-30-3, exactly half of 600-60-6 :eek:

Chris Ellsworth

09-19-2012, 12:16 PM

That's a pretty cool pic. Those crop circle folks really put their heart and soul into their art.

No kidding, you think they were trying to tell us something :)

Recognize it:confused:
http://img.techpowerup.org/120406/rE37.jpg

How about now:signthankspin:
http://img.techpowerup.org/120406/DPP_217__56689_zoom.jpg
:p

weeder

09-21-2012, 06:12 PM

Isaiah 1:18,
. Come now, let us debate, says the Lord. If your sins prove to be like crimson, they will become white as snow; if they prove to be as red as crimson dye, they shall become as wool.

Rashi:

snow = שֶּׁלֶג. in numbers 300-30-3, exactly half of 600-60-6 :eek:

:yo: :)

How did you react when you viewed my link?
Anyone else gobsmacked by the beauty of these things, and no two snowflakes are alike .
Manmade snow doesnt come close :)

Richard Amiel McGough

09-21-2012, 09:04 PM

Absolutely facinating and mindboggling.
Wonderful Design Design Design Design.
Reminds me of the heart and soul of God who put his love into every creature, flower, food etc that he has made....It delights us and makes the taste buds dance.
Ever hear the phrase "nature red in tooth and claw"? Kinda puts the lie to God putting his "love into every creature" doesn't it? The famous line comes from Alfred Lord Tennyson's In Memoriam A. H. H., 1850. The quotation comes in Canto 56 (it is a very long poem) and refers to man ...

Who trusted God was love indeed
And love Creation's final law
Tho' Nature, red in tooth and claw
With ravine, shriek'd against his creed

Read that slowly and thoughtfully ....

Richard Amiel McGough

09-21-2012, 09:08 PM

snow = שֶּׁלֶג. in numbers 300-30-3, exactly half of 600-60-6 :eek:
And an even more interesting number is the value of the word http://biblewheel.com/images/GR/00373H_OfTheSnow.gif (mishleg) = of the snow = 373 = LOGOS (Word, John 1:1).

The number 373 is a prime, and it is the Koch Snowflake "of the snow" = 373. You can read all about it in my article called The Logos Star (http://biblewheel.com/GR/GR_LogosStar.asp)

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

Richard Amiel McGough

09-21-2012, 09:13 PM

No kidding, you think they were trying to tell us something :)

Recognize it:confused:
http://img.techpowerup.org/120406/rE37.jpg

How about now:signthankspin:

:p
Yeah, folks into sacred geometry like hexagons. What's your point? What do you thin they are trying to tell us?

Richard Amiel McGough

09-21-2012, 09:14 PM

This reminds me of the structure of a single snowflake...such beauty falls to the ground in their millions totally unnoticed.

http://www.its.caltech.edu/~atomic/snowcrystals/photos/photos.htm
Yeah, I love those pics. Thanks for sharing. It shows the beauty that arises from chance events governed by natural law.

weeder

09-21-2012, 10:20 PM

Yeah, I love those pics. Thanks for sharing. It shows the beauty that arises from chance events governed by natural law.

Chance events :confused:
Each single snowstorm produces a smorgasbord of elaborate beauty.....each snowflake designed in different but equally remarkable way..

There is something happening here and dont know what it is ,do you Mr Jones.:lol:

Richard Amiel McGough

09-21-2012, 11:21 PM

Chance events :confused:
Each single snowstorm produces a smorgasbord of elaborate beauty.....each snowflake designed in different but equally remarkable way..

There is something happening here and dont know what it is ,do you Mr Jones.:lol:
Are you suggesting that the structure of the snowflakes are not governed by natural law and chance? What are you suggesting? That God designed each snowflake?

sylvius

09-21-2012, 11:31 PM

And an even more interesting number is the value of the word http://biblewheel.com/images/GR/00373H_OfTheSnow.gif (mishleg) = of the snow = 373 = LOGOS (Word, John 1:1).

The number 373 is a prime, and it is the Koch Snowflake "of the snow" = 373. You can read all about it in my article called The Logos Star (http://biblewheel.com/GR/GR_LogosStar.asp)

( Koch Snowflake) "of the snow", that's rather artificial and your own invention.

Yet "misheleg" occurs in the bible.

Psalms 51:9,
Purge me with hyssop, and I shall be clean; wash me, and I shall be whiter than snow.

Proverbs 31:21,
She fears not for her household for snow, for all her household are dressed in crimson.

Lamentatiosn 4:7,
Her Nazirites were purer than snow, they were whiter than milk, their appearance was ruddier than coral, [and] sapphire was their form.

"The Logos Star" that's even more nonsense.
You can't compare/equate Hebrew gematria with Greek.

"mushlag" = covered with snow, snow-capped.

Timmy

09-22-2012, 10:14 AM

( Koch Snowflake) "of the snow", that's rather artificial and your own invention.

Yet "misheleg" occurs in the bible. . . "The Logos Star" that's even more nonsense.
You can't compare/equate Hebrew gematria with Greek.

"mushlag" = covered with snow, snow-capped.
Greetings and salutations from another spectrum in this shadowland of existence!

Can't compare???

Did you know "Vicar of Christ" written in Hebrew and Greek . . .
. . . and even Latin equals 666 ?

What do you think of that?
Mayhaps they realleally are trying to tell us something!:eek:

Here it is wondered how much of what we think we see, even the topic of this chemical bonding thread, is actually "observerer created..."
...and how much of it is actually there, praytell?

We only have two dimensional vision folks, and we dwell in a 10+ dimensional multiverse.
It is only the infinitely various spirals of light that altercates perceptual parameters.

In complete darkness we are all the same.

Seriously,

Thee Archetypal Theriomorph

Richard Amiel McGough

09-22-2012, 10:55 AM

( Koch Snowflake) "of the snow", that's rather artificial and your own invention.

Yet "misheleg" occurs in the bible.

Psalms 51:9,
Purge me with hyssop, and I shall be clean; wash me, and I shall be whiter than snow.

Proverbs 31:21,
She fears not for her household for snow, for all her household are dressed in crimson.

Lamentatiosn 4:7,
Her Nazirites were purer than snow, they were whiter than milk, their appearance was ruddier than coral, [and] sapphire was their form.

"The Logos Star" that's even more nonsense.
You can't compare/equate Hebrew gematria with Greek.

"mushlag" = covered with snow, snow-capped.
You posted the Koch Star that equals 773 and made associations with the value of Hebrew words, and when I present similar evidence you say it is my "own invention." Your comments are ludicrous and totally inconsistent. I didn't "invent" anything. The facts are the facts and you cannot refute a word I wrote.

Your assertion that you "can't compare/equate Hebrew gematria with Greek" is just your own stupid and ignorant opinion. The facts are the facts and you cannot refute a word I wrote. The value of Logos is 373 and that's the value of the Koch Star I posted. And it relates to the Hebrew value of Wisdom = 73. Your comments are ridiculous, except in as much as you confirmed my assertion about the meaning of mishleg and misheleg.

sylvius

09-22-2012, 12:14 PM

You posted the Koch Star that equals 773 and made associations with the value of Hebrew words, and when I present similar evidence you say it is my "own invention." Your comments are ludicrous and totally inconsistent. I didn't "invent" anything. The facts are the facts and you cannot refute a word I wrote.

Your assertion that you "can't compare/equate Hebrew gematria with Greek" is just your own stupid and ignorant opinion. The facts are the facts and you cannot refute a word I wrote. The value of Logos is 373 and that's the value of the Koch Star I posted. And it relates to the Hebrew value of Wisdom = 73. Your comments are ridiculous, except in as much as you confirmed my assertion about the meaning of mishleg and misheleg.

The word is "sheleg" = snow; gematria 333.

"misheleg" indeed has gematria 373; but that says nothing about "koch snowflake", like if it had to do with the Hebrew word for snow.

The word is a building of letters; the letters, i.e. consonants, are the buildingblocks of the word.

The letters form the body of the word.

The breath blows the vocals through it, so that it sounds..

( I do think this is also the meaning of "and the word became flesh, John 1:14. Flesh = Hebrew "basar", root of "b'sorah" = Gospel, (good) tiding.)

Greek alphabet has also signs for vocals. (fe. "logos" having two times the vocal "o") which makes Greek gematria invalid.

Richard Amiel McGough

09-22-2012, 01:32 PM

cf. 607

which is an image of the number 733 = (7 x 73) + (6 x 37)

733 is gematria of לַבַּת-אֵשׁ, "labbat-esh", flame of fire, Exodus 3:2,
And the angel of the LORD appeared unto him in a flame of fire out of the midst of a bush

It being in a sphere "beyond speech", since Exodus 3:1 has אַחַר הַמִּדְבָּר, "achar hamidbar", and "midbar" can mean desert but also speech.

The word is "sheleg" = snow; gematria 333.

"misheleg" indeed has gematria 373; but that says nothing about "koch snowflake", like if it had to do with the Hebrew word for snow.

So there you go folks! silvius is happy to make whatever associations he likes between numbers, geometry, and Hebrew words. Anything he says is true just because he said it. But if anyone else makes similar associations between words, numbers, geometry, and Hebrew and Greek words, they are just "inventing" things with no meaning.

The word is a building of letters; the letters, i.e. consonants, are the buildingblocks of the word.

The letters form the body of the word.

The breath blows the vocals through it, so that it sounds..

Yep - Hebrew is different than Greek. It is more fundamental. But that doesn't mean that Greek gematria is any different than the Hebrew version.

And the simple fact is that the same evidence for Hebrew gematria in Genesis 1:1 also shows that it is unified with John 1:1 in Greek, so you simply don't know what you are talking about.

( I do think this is also the meaning of "and the word became flesh, John 1:14. Flesh = Hebrew "basar", root of "b'sorah" = Gospel, (good) tiding.)

That seems pretty unlikely. You don't even believe the Gospel was "good news" do you"? And for that matter, you don't even believe that Jesus was messiah, so all your connections seem pretty weird. What's your point?

Greek alphabet has also signs for vocals. (fe. "logos" having two times the vocal "o") which makes Greek gematria invalid.
Say who? You, the master of all gematria? There is no reason the vowels in Greek invalidate gematria. You just made that up because you don't like Greek gematria and you don't understand it.

sylvius

09-22-2012, 11:55 PM

That seems pretty unlikely. You don't even believe the Gospel was "good news" do you"?

"b'sorah tovah" = good news.

"b'sorah ra'ah'= bad news.

"b'sorot iyow" = very bad news.

So the Gospel might be good news for the one, but bad news for the other.

Good news for the blind, bad news for the seeing, bad news for the arrogant.

Isaiah 61:1,

The spirit of the Lord GOD is upon me; because the LORD hath anointed me to bring good tidings unto the humble; He hath sent me to bind up the broken-hearted, to proclaim liberty to the captives, and the opening of the eyes to them that are bound;

And for that matter, you don't even believe that Jesus was messiah
He is.

Chris Ellsworth

09-23-2012, 06:34 AM

http://img.techpowerup.org/120923/uuf05.jpg

Yin/Yang,Pi, or star:/ is the same regardless of how your draw it. Really has nothing to do with numbers. Plus from what I can tell old cultures only knew how to add and subtract. Snowflakes do rock, especially when you view em from the side, yin/yang:)

http://img.techpowerup.org/120923/mandala-200.jpg

Whatever definition you have time, gravity, speed, you can use the above to help ratio :winking0071:

sylvius

09-24-2012, 12:24 AM

Did you know "Vicar of Christ" written in Hebrew and Greek . . .
. . . and even Latin equals 666 ?

Can you please show that?

Latin: Vicarius Christi

I don't see,

How it is in Greek?
And how in Hebrew?

sylvius

09-24-2012, 12:47 AM

And the simple fact is that the same evidence for Hebrew gematria in Genesis 1:1 also shows that it is unified with John 1:1 in Greek, so you simply don't know what you are talking about.

Unified?
I don't see.
http://www.biblewheel.com/gr/GR_Creation_John1.asp
You calculated the number 3627 = 39 x 93
But 39 and 93 are not prime numbers, like 73 and 73.

Or do you mean John hints at the gematrial structure of Genesis 1:1, by writing Ἐν ἀρχῇ ἦν ὁ λόγος, "Ã¯n the beginning was the word"?

The value of Logos is 373 and that's the value of the Koch Star I posted

Do you think then that John 1:14 , Καὶ ὁ λόγος σὰρξ ἐγένετο "And the word became flesh" has to be understood from the "koch star that equals 373"?

And how then?

Richard Amiel McGough

09-24-2012, 09:39 AM

Unified?
I don't see.
http://www.biblewheel.com/gr/GR_Creation_John1.asp
You calculated the number 3627 = 39 x 93
But 39 and 93 are not prime numbers, like 73 and 73.

Or do you mean John hints at the gematrial structure of Genesis 1:1, by writing Ἐν ἀρχῇ ἦν ὁ λόγος, "Ã¯n the beginning was the word"?

This is what I meant by "unified" - Creation Holograph: Full Integration (http://www.biblewheel.com/gr/GR_Creation_Hyper.asp)

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

Do you think then that John 1:14 , Καὶ ὁ λόγος σὰρξ ἐγένετο "And the word became flesh" has to be understood from the "koch star that equals 373"?

And how then?
No. The number 373 is the value of the word LOGOS.

The number 19 relates to physical manifestation and the flesh (sarx = 19 x 19). That's why John 1:14 is built upon many nested multiples of 19 as seen in the Grace Manifest Holograph (http://www.biblewheel.com/gr/GR_Grace.asp) (114 = 19 x 6 = Chanon/Grace):

http://www.biblewheel.com/images/grace1.gif

sylvius

09-24-2012, 11:17 AM

This is what I meant by "unified" - Creation Holograph: Full Integration (http://www.biblewheel.com/gr/GR_Creation_Hyper.asp)

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

The only "unification" I do see lies in the fact that 373 as (7x37) + (6x19) shows up the number 37 that is also hidden in Genesis 1:1.

But, as said, you can't compare or equate Greek gematria with Hebrew gematria.

OIW your "Creation HyperHolograph" proves nothing.

I would like to see an example from the Gospel of John from which it might be clear that John worked with Greek gematria.

It seems just highly unlikely that he wanted to stress the number 373 as gematria of both καὶ θεὸς ἦν and λόγος..

Maybe revealing is the fact that you have the article ὁ, which stands for the Hebrew letter "hey", fall out of the ship...

"The heart of wisdom" is as far as I know, not a biblical phrase.

(John has the numbers 38 and 153, that, without any doubt, refer to Hebrew gematria and not to Greek,)

The number 19 relates to physical manifestation and the flesh (sarx = 19 x 19). That's why John 1:14 is built upon many nested multiples of 19 as seen in the Grace Manifest Holograph (http://www.biblewheel.com/gr/GR_Grace.asp) (114 = 19 x 6 = Chanon/Grace):

http://www.biblewheel.com/images/grace1.gif

19 is the number of the name Chavah = Eve.

It is also the amount of years in the Ibbur-cycle, counting 12 years of twelve (moon-)months and 7 years of 13 (moon-)months.

Favor (grace) = "Ã§hen", gematria 58, coinciding the 58 facets of the brilliant.

When it regretted the Lord that he had made man upon the earth and wanted to blot out man and make an end to all flesh, Noach was the one to find favor in his eyes. The name Noach also having gematria 58. (Noach being the reverse of "chen" , it is just that "chen" is written with the outstretched nun that also concludes the book of Daniel)

The year of the flood had a duration 0f 365 years, exceeding a year of twelve moon-months by ten days.

Genesis 8:14, which is about htis 365th day, having the same gematria as Genesis 1:1, viz. 2701.

Which is in fact the ideal "yom kippur", the tenth day of the new year.

A Jewish year in practice never equates 365 days.

"yom kippur" being the day of the last trumpet, τῇ ἐσχάτῃ σάλπιγγι, 1 Corinthians 15:52.

Richard Amiel McGough

09-24-2012, 12:20 PM

The only "unification" I do see lies in the fact that 373 as (7x37) + (6x19) shows up the number 37 that is also hidden in Genesis 1:1.

There's a lot more shown than that. You seem to have trouble with your eye sight.

But, as said, you can't compare or equate Greek gematria with Hebrew gematria.

That's your own biased opinion. Who cares?

OIW your "Creation HyperHolograph" proves nothing.

Light proves nothing to a blind man.

I would like to see an example from the Gospel of John from which it might be clear that John worked with Greek gematria.

I never said that the authors of the NT worked consciously with Greek gematria, and the one case where they were consciously working with gematria in 13:18 is Hebrew. But there is a hint concerning the giving of the law and its relation to the number 430 which is the value of the Greek word "nomos" -

Galatians 3:17 What I mean is this: The law (nomos = 430), introduced 430 years later, does not set aside the covenant previously established by God and thus do away with the promise.

It seems just highly unlikely that he wanted to stress the number 373 as gematria of both καὶ θεὸς ἦν and λόγος..

I never said that "he" had anything to do with the patterns of gematria. I don't think the author of Genesis 1:1 had any idea about the gematria either.

Maybe revealing is the fact that you have the article ὁ, which stands for the Hebrew letter "hey", fall out of the ship...

"The heart of wisdom" is as far as I know, not a biblical phrase.

You make up mountains of crap from stuff that is not written. For example the word "ed" is not written in Gen 2:6 but rather v'ed. So you make up an excuse why it's ok for you to invent stuff based on ed = 1 + 4 but then attack me if I do the same thing. Your criticisms are inconsistent and so reveal your baseless bias that skews your understanding.

(John has the numbers 38 and 153, that, without any doubt, refer to Hebrew gematria and not to Greek,)

Greek and the Hebrew gematria are profoundly integrated. You are blind to this because you willfully close your eyes.

19 is the number of the name Chavah = Eve.

That's exactly correct. And so we have the relation tzela (rib) = 190 = 10 x 19 (Eve)

I talked about this in my article The Number 19 - Physical Manifestation (http://www.biblewheel.com/gr/gr_19.asp). That's why I use that word in title of the Grace Manifest Holograph (http://www.biblewheel.com/gr/GR_Grace.asp) where I explain many of the relations.

The Greek word for flesh is sarx = 19 x 19 = amnos (lamb, the symbol of Christ's flesh). This is an example of the coherence between Greek and Hebrew gematria. And here is another example. The number 2869 = 19 x 151 and it relates the Hebrew prophecy of Christ's crucifixion to to the phrase "the body of Jesus":

http://www.biblewheel.com/images/Body2869.gif
I explain this in my article Quph - The Body of Jesus (http://www.biblewheel.com/InnerWheels/John/John19.asp). And another example is the word maqum (place, Hebrew) = 186 = Golgotha (Greek), cf. The Place of the Skull (http://www.biblewheel.com/wheel/spokes/Quph_place.asp). This is the stone of stumbling (even negeph) = 186.

The rabbis concur concerning the symbolic meaning of the number 19. In his Wisdom of the Hebrew Alphabet Rabbi Munk says
The fact that the same letter http://www.biblewheel.com/images/q_b14.gif repesents both kedushah [holiness] and an animal [ape] that is a parody of humanity offers a deep insight about man's role. Man is created in the image of God and is only a little lower than the angels (Psalms 8:6). Though he can never attain God's holiness, he is charged with emulating Him and is assured that he can scale celestial heights. But he can do so only if his efforts are concerted and sincere. If man acts as an "image of God," his potential is boundless. If he is merely a poor imitation of what man should be, he is hardly better than a primate.

I could go on, but it wouldn't matter. You have chosen to close your mind to anything that doesn't fit your prejudices. How pathetic.

Favor (grace) = "Ã§hen", gematria 58, coinciding the 58 facets of the brilliant.

Yes, and Grace is the essence of the Cross, Tav (Cross) = 406 = 7 (Perfection) x 58 (Grace in Hebrew) and this coheres with the Sepher Yetzirah which says that Tav is "king over grace" and it is confirmed again by Greek gematria (see my article on Multiples of Seven (http://www.biblewheel.com/GR/GR_MultiplesOfSeven.asp)):

The Grace of our Lord Jesus Christ = 6377 = 7 (Perfection) x 911 (Charis, Grace in Greek)
http://www.biblewheel.com/images/GR/06377G_LordsCross_centered.gif

Same pattern in Greek and Hebrew gematria.

And of course the Greek value of Holy Spirit is ten times the Hebrew value of Dove, just like the Greek value of Christ is ten times the Hebrew value of Passover. There are many fascinating correlations linking Greek and Hebrew gemtria:

Root

Hebraic Origin
Greek Fulfillment (10 x Root)

148 (http://www.biblewheel.com/GR/GR_148.asp)
Passover
Christ

71 (http://www.biblewheel.com/GR/GR_71.asp)
Dove
The Holy Spirit

232 (http://www.biblewheel.com/GR/GR_232.asp)
Eternal God
The One who is, and who
was,and who is to come

696 (http://www.biblewheel.com/GR/GR_696.asp)
Thou shalt have no other
gods before me
Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God,
and him only shalt thou serve.

See my article Multiples of Ten (http://www.biblewheel.com/GR/GR_Ten.asp). I could go on, but you don't care. At least this will show others that your opinions have no basis in fact.

When it regretted the Lord that he had made man upon the earth and wanted to blot out man and make an end to all flesh, Noach was the one to find favor in his eyes. The name Noach also having gematria 58. (Noach being the reverse of "chen" , it is just that "chen" is written with the outstretched nun that also concludes the book of Daniel)

Of course. I wrote about that ten years ago in my article An Ancient Witness (http://www.biblewheel.com/Wheel/AncientWitness.asp) which showed how the Sepher Yetzirah coheres with Greek gematria.

Genesis 8:14, which is about htis 365th day, having the same gematria as Genesis 1:1, viz. 2701.

Yep. I've known that for years. It is also interesting that it divides into 1690 + 1011 = 2701

1690 = And in the second month, on the twenty-seventh
1101 = day of the month, the earth was dry.

Genesis 1:1 divides into the same two numbers if we take the sums of alternating words (see my article Divine Tapestry of Genesis 1:1 (http://www.biblewheel.com/GR/GR_LogosStar_Genesis.asp)).

http://www.biblewheel.com/images/Gen1_1b.gif

The sum of the third and fifth words (Elohim + heaven) equals the value of "The Genesis" in Greek. And the words in the even positions sum to the Greek value of The Heavens and the Earth, but of course these things have nothing to do with Genesis 1 because they are written in Greek and you, the great judge of all truth, have declared that there can be no correlation between the gematria of those two languages. :doh:

And the sum of the first and last words is 1/3 the value of John 1:1 and the sum of the third and fifth words is the value of "The Genesis" and also 1/48 of the sum of John 1:2-5 showing another integration with the Greek. And of course the greatest example of the integration of Greek and Hebrew gematria is found in the Shema, the Unity Holograph (http://www.biblewheel.com/GR/GR_Unity.asp), which Christ declared to be the greatest commandment:

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

Here we see the three great names of God: YHVH, Elohim, and The Father (Greek) united in the Shema which sums to 1118 = 13 (Echad/One) x 86 (Elohim/God) which encodes the meaning of the entire Shema and reveals the Trinity. And this is profoundly integrated with John 1:1-5 which also is integrated with Genesis 1:1-5:

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

The Shema, Genesis 1:1-5 and John 1:1-5 are all profoundly integrated:

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

And John 1:1-5 integrates with the Logos Holograph (Hebrews 4:12)

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

And there are many other examples that show the overwhelming integration of the Greek gematria of John 1:1-5 with the Hebrew gematria of Genesis 1:1-5 and the Shema and Hebrews 4:12 and John 1:14. But you don't care about any of this evidence because evidence means nothing to you. You have chosen to blind yourself. That's a bad choice in my estimation.

sylvius

09-24-2012, 01:46 PM

There's a lot more shown than that.

what for example?

I never said that the authors of the NT worked consciously with Greek gematria, except in the unique case of rev 13:18. 666 Greek gematria?

Though there is a hint concerning the giving of the law and its relation to the number 430 which is the value of the Greek word "nomos"

The 430 years are mentioned in Exodus 12:41;
being the amount of years after "the covenant between the pieces", when the seed was promised to Abraham (Genesis 15); that's why Paul mentions the 430 years, not because of they should be gematria of "nomos".

Strange thing is that Abraham must have been 70 years old by that time, while he was already 75 when leaving Charan.
I think the five years allude to the article "ho" you threw away from "logos".

430 is gematria of "nefesh", soul, the soul Jesus did give as ransom for the many.

430 is also gematria of Rameses. The first desert journey, on the first day of pesach, the same day as on which Jesus was crucified (according to the Synoptici), went from Rameses to Sukkot, from 430 to 480, difference 50 (coincding the 50 days from the second day of pesach till pentecost)

I never said that "he" had anything to do with the patterns of gematria.

He deliberately mentioned the numbers 38 and 153.

You make up mountains of crap from stuff that is not written. For example the word "ed" is not written in Gen 2:6 but rather v'ed. , the word is "ed", "v-" is prefix.
Like also fe. gematria of "arets", earth, is 291, although quite often there is written "v'arets", or "haarets" or "v'haarets"

So you make up an excuse why it's ok for you to invent stuff based on ed = 1 + 4 but then attack me if I do the same thing.
- you just skip it to balance your comparison, "And God was (the) word" -- when "And God was" = "the word" it might have made more sense (if it had sense at all).

That's exactly correct. And so we have the relation tzela (rib) = 190 = 10 x 19 (Eve)

So God could make ten women from one rib?

Eve must have been rather confused then, since every time Adam returned home the first thing she did was count his ribs.

.

The Greek word for flesh is sarx = 19 x 19 = amnos (lamb, the symbol of Christ's flesh).
Symbol of Christ's flesh?
Has this to do with the saying "The spirit is willing but the flesh is weak"?
(Hebrew "keves"= lamb, while "kevesh" = footstool, from "kavash" to suppress, subdue, to rape, )

This is an example of the coherence between Greek and Hebrew gematria. ?? they are both Greek words.

And here is another example. The number 2869 = 19 x 151 and it relates the Hebrew prophecy of Christ's crucifixion to to the phrase "the body of Jesus":

http://www.biblewheel.com/images/Body2869.gif
I explain this in my article Quph - The Body of Jesus (http://www.biblewheel.com/InnerWheels/John/John19.asp).

That's really sought.

And another example is the word maqum (place, Hebrew) = 186 = Golgotha (Greek), cf. The Place of the Skull (http://www.biblewheel.com/wheel/spokes/Quph_place.asp). This is the stone of stumbling (even negeph) = 186.
I don't see no proof.

The rabbis concur concerning the symbolic meaning of the number 19. In his Wisdom of the Hebrew Alphabet Rabbi Munk says
The fact that the same letter http://www.biblewheel.com/images/q_b14.gif repesents both kedushah [holiness] and an animal [ape] that is a parody of humanity offers a deep insight about man's role. Man is created in the image of God and is only a little lower than the angels (Psalms 8:6). Though he can never attain God's holiness, he is charged with emulating Him and is assured that he can scale celestial heights. But he can do so only if his efforts are concerted and sincere. If man acts as an "image of God," his potential is boundless. If he is merely a poor imitation of what man should be, he is hardly better than a primate.

Rabbi Munk doesn't mention the number 19, but the meaning of the letter "Kuf".

Value of "kuf" is 100.

Since it is about decimal counting, the numbers 10 and 100 are like joints.
10 being the last of the units and the first of the decimals, 100 the last of the decimals and the first of the hundreds (that go no further than 400)

Yes, and Grace is the essence of the Cross, Tav (Cross) = 406 = 7 (Perfection) x 58 (Grace in Hebrew) and this coheres with the Sepher Yetzirah which says that Tav is "king over grace" and it is confirmed again by Greek gematria (see my article on Multiples of Seven (http://www.biblewheel.com/GR/GR_MultiplesOfSeven.asp)):

"Tav" is not "the cross", but (cross)sign.

Greek "stauros" doesn't mean cross, but stake,

The Grace of our Lord Jesus Christ = 6377 = 7 (Perfection) x 911 (Charis, Grace in Greek)
http://www.biblewheel.com/images/GR/06377G_LordsCross_centered.gif

Same pattern in Greek and Hebrew gematria.

And of course the Greek value of Holy Spirit is ten times the Hebrew value of Dove, just like the Greek value of Christ is ten times the Hebrew value of Passover. There are many fascinating correlations linking Greek and Hebrew gemtria:

Root

Hebraic Origin
Greek Fulfillment (10 x Root)

148 (http://www.biblewheel.com/GR/GR_148.asp)
Passover
Christ

71 (http://www.biblewheel.com/GR/GR_71.asp)
Dove
The Holy Spirit

232 (http://www.biblewheel.com/GR/GR_232.asp)
Eternal God
The One who is, and who
was,and who is to come

696 (http://www.biblewheel.com/GR/GR_696.asp)
Thou shalt have no other
gods before me
Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God,
and him only shalt thou serve.

See my article Multiples of Ten (http://www.biblewheel.com/GR/GR_Ten.asp). I could go on, but you don't care.

ok I am blind for that; I don't see no light in it.

. It is also interesting that it divides into 1690 + 1011 = 2701

1690 = And in the second month, on the twenty-seventh
1101 = day of the month, the earth was dry.

That's good.

But you don't care about any of this evidence because evidence means nothing to you.

I don't see no evidence, i am sorry.

Richard Amiel McGough

09-24-2012, 03:33 PM

The 430 years are mentioned in Exodus 12:41;
being the amount of years after "the covenant between the pieces", when the seed was promised to Abraham (Genesis 15); that's why Paul mentions the 430 years, not because of they should be gematria of "nomos".

Paul probably did not know of the connection, but you don't know that he didn't. So once again, we see you making assertions that have no foundation in fact.

And you missed my point. The connection is between the number 430 which is the value of nomos and the mention of nomos in the same verse. If Paul did not do it consciously, then some other process was involved, or it was a mere coincidence.

That's the primary problem with all your gematria. You have no way to discern between chance and design. You just cherry pick numbers and words that you can force to fit your preconceived ideas. It is pure foolishness.

Strange thing is that Abraham must have been 70 years old by that time, while he was already 75 when leaving Charan.
I think the five years allude to the article "ho" you threw away from "logos".

I didn't "throw away the ho from logos." I can't believe how willing you are to make such ignorant and false assertions. Every Greek noun in the nominative case has two values associated with it, one with the article and one without. Both are significant. The "ho" makes the Logos "definite" - that's why it's called the "definite article." The two values play critical roles in the Logos Holograph which is indexed by the digits of the value of the name of the second letter, Bet = 412. To understand why this is significant, you need to understand the full range of symbolic meanings of the the letter Bet and associated archetypes.

The Second Letter is the archetype representing the Numerical Category defined by the Number 2. It includes all the related archetypes such as Duality, Division, Distinction, Image, Reflection and so forth. The concept of the Word as based on distinction, using terms such as signification and meaning. This coheres precisely with the fundamentally dualistic nature of the concept of the Word as explained by Yale professor E. H. Sturtevant in his Introduction to Linguistic Science:
A symbol [word] necessarily involves a dualism; there must be something that stands for or represents something else. This many be indicated by a diagram:

611This relation is the foundation of Linguistic Science. A word is the signifier that houses a concept, the thing signified. The form contains the meaning. A word defines things by dividing between "this and that" just as a house is a container that defines between "in" and "out." This coheres with its role in Hebrew grammar where it functions as the sign of the preposition "in." Thus we understand that the Second Person of the Trinity - the Son (Ben = Bet KeyWord, just as the First Person Father = Av = Aleph KeyWord) is described as the Word of God and the Image of God. We find this Numerical Category used quite consistently throughout the Bible:

Number 2 in Semiotics: Represents Division, Image, Reflection, Duality
Number 2 in Theology: Represents the Son, the Second Person of the Trinity.
Number 2 in Scripture:

Second Day: Division of the Waters
Second Seal: Great Sword, War, Division of the People (= Waters, Rev. 17.15)
Second Commandment: No graven Images - relates to Duality, Reflection, and Second Person as Image of the invisible God.

Number 2 in Linguistics: The Word is the "linguistic image" of an object. It divides - like a sword - between this and that. The Duality of the Signifier and thing Signified is the foundation of this study. It integrates with Theology and Scripture because "The Word" is the name of the Second Person of the Godhead.

I explain a lot of these ideas in my Spoke 2 article called The Structure of Genesis (http://www.biblewheel.com/wheel/spokes/bet_exodus.asp).

With this understanding, we can see how all these ideas cohere with the idea of "God's House" which is his Word and we have the identity:
Bet-El (God's House) = 412 + 31 = 443 = Ho Logos (The Word)

And this is the central theme of the Logos Holograph which is indexed by the number 412 and which is based on the two large prime values associated with the Logos, 373 and 443. I begin with the first clause:
http://www.biblewheel.com/images/LogosHolograph443a.gif

This self-reflective structure is based on the value of "The Logos" = 443 and the phrase "For the word of God is living" = 6 x 443. The rest of the holograph is based on multiples of the prime numbers 73 = Hokmah (Wisdom, Hebrew) and 373 = Logos which are similar in that they both are formed from the digits 3 and 7, and they are both based on the hexagonal star numbers:

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

These numbers also related to the Creation Holograph, Genesis 1:1 = 2701 = 37 x 73. Thus we have the Logos Holograph based on the concept of God's House (Bet) which is a symbol of God's Word:

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

430 is gematria of "nefesh", soul, the soul Jesus did give as ransom for the many.

430 is also gematria of Rameses. The first desert journey, on the first day of pesach, the same day as on which Jesus was crucified (according to the Synoptici), went from Rameses to Sukkot, from 430 to 480, difference 50 (coincding the 50 days from the second day of pesach till pentecost)

You are just picking and choosing whatever values you like. Your study is not disciplined like mine where I restrict myself to the self-reflective alphanumeric structures of entire passages.

He deliberately mentioned the numbers 38 and 153.

That doesn't prove he was thinking of Hebrew gematria.

, the word is "ed", "v-" is prefix.
Like also fe. gematria of "arets", earth, is 291, although quite often there is written "v'arets", or "haarets" or "v'haarets"

As usually, you make up excuses for your DOUBLE STANDARD. When I do exactly the same thing as you with a Hebrew word, you reject it. That is profoundly irrational.

- you just skip it to balance your comparison, "And God was (the) word" -- when "And God was" = "the word" it might have made more sense (if it had sense at all).

That is not true. I account for both values 373 and 443. You just make up random stuff that is totally meaningless like "ed" and then build huge speculations out of nothing. My work is solid and advanced. Your work is like a child playing with finger paint drawing random squiggles.

So God could make ten women from one rib?

God did not make Eve from a rib. Eve didn't even exist. It's all part of the story. The story may have a deep meaning, but it's nothing like what you are Christians think.

Symbol of Christ's flesh?

You don't understand something that basic? The passover lamb was a symbol of Christ's flesh. "Christ our passover has been sacrificed for us."

?? they are both Greek words.

They are both Greek words with the value 19 x 19 which relates to the idea of manifestation and flesh in both Greek and Hebrew.

The Greek word for flesh is sarx = 19 x 19 = amnos (lamb, the symbol of Christ's flesh). This is an example of the coherence between Greek and Hebrew gematria. And here is another example. The number 2869 = 19 x 151 and it relates the Hebrew prophecy of Christ's crucifixion to to the phrase "the body of Jesus":

http://www.biblewheel.com/images/Body2869.gif
I explain this in my article Quph - The Body of Jesus (http://www.biblewheel.com/InnerWheels/John/John19.asp). And another example is the word maqum (place, Hebrew) = 186 = Golgotha (Greek), cf. The Place of the Skull (http://www.biblewheel.com/wheel/spokes/Quph_place.asp). This is the stone of stumbling (even negeph) = 186.

That's really sought.

How did I "seek" that identity? John quoted that verse when speaking of the body of Christ, in context. Your comments are absurd and reveal nothing but your gross ignorance and willful blindness. You can't refute a word I write so you make up meaningless crap. Your word "sought" means nothing except as a description of what you do on a regular basis.

I explain this in my article Quph - The Body of Jesus (http://www.biblewheel.com/InnerWheels/John/John19.asp). And another example is the word maqum (place, Hebrew) = 186 = Golgotha (Greek), cf. The Place of the Skull (http://www.biblewheel.com/wheel/spokes/Quph_place.asp). This is the stone of stumbling (even negeph) = 186.
I don't see no proof.

Of course not. You don't see anything you don't want to see. You've been proving this for years. You are willfully blind. And your next comment proves it, in spades.

Rabbi Munk doesn't mention the number 19, but the meaning of the letter "Kuf".

Value of "kuf" is 100.

Perfect. Now you display your gross ignorance for all to see. The name of the letter Quf = 186 = maqom (place) = Golgotha (Greek) = the place where the flesh (19 x 19) of Christ was crucified as I discussed above, and you responded by saying "I don't see no proof." Do you really enjoy being ignorant? Is that what this is all about?

"Tav" is not "the cross", but (cross)sign.

Same difference.

Greek "stauros" doesn't mean cross, but stake,

Yes, it can mean stake, but it can also mean cross. Are you ignorant of everything?

ok I am blind for that; I don't see no light in it.

That's because you don't want to see.

That's good.

That's because you want to see that one minor point because it is based on Hebrew. You are totally inconsistent and confused.

I don't see no evidence, i am sorry.
I don't think you are sorry at all. You ignore all the evidence mererly because you don't want to see it. That's very sad (for you).

sylvius

09-25-2012, 01:01 AM

Paul probably did not know of the connection

He makes his argument with it.

In fact it was also 430 years after the "mother of all wars", the war of the four kings against the five, where Abraham gained victory with help of his 318 trained servants (Genesis 14), since Genesis 15:1 reads: . אַחַר הַדְּבָרִים הָאֵלֶּה, "achar hd'varim haeleh", after these incidents.

Rashi:

Wherever the term אַחַר is used, it signifies immediately afterwards; אַחִרֵי signifies a long time afterwards (Gen. Rabbah 44:5). After this miracle had been wrought for him, that he slew the kings, he was worried and said, â€œPerhaps I have received reward for all my righteous deeds.â€

And you missed my point. The connection is between the number 430 which is the value of nomos and the mention of nomos in the same verse. If Paul did not do it consciously, then some other process was involved, or it was a mere coincidence.
So you admit that your Greek gematria is just nonsense?

That's the primary problem with all your gematria. You have no way to discern between chance and design. You just cherry pick numbers and words that you can force to fit your preconceived ideas. It is pure foolishness. I think this applies to yourself.

I didn't "throw away the ho from logos." I meant the letter "hey" from the word "hashishi", the 434th word of the Hebrew bible,

The two values play critical roles in the Logos Holograph the Logos Holograph was your own invention ...

With this understanding, we can see how all these ideas cohere with the idea of "God's House" which is his Word and we have the identity:[INDENT]Bet-El (God's House) = 412 + 31 = 443 = Ho Logos (The Word)
Again you do compare Hebrew with Greek gematria, for which you have no allowance.
And there is not any sense in it either.
Jacob called the place where he dreamt of the ladder Bet-El, where it was called before Luz , with gematria 43 (Genesis 28:19), in which might be a deeper sense. ("Luz" means nut, hazel or almond, and is also the name of the famous bone that cannot decay, not in burnt in fire and not dissolved in water. Since water is symbol of time, "400" might allude to "oceans of time", billions and billions of years. Time in which Egypt, the sphere of duality, went under )

You are just picking and choosing whatever values you like.
Which might be a matter of favor, "chen".

That doesn't prove he was thinking of Hebrew gematria.
I made it plausible,

"tov", good, with gematria 17, is the 153rd word of the bible; 153 being triangle 17.
It wouldn't have been the 153rd word when the earth had brought forth "ets pri oseh pri" (fruit tree making fruit) instead of "ets oseh pri" (tree making fruit). Tehn it would have been the 154th word, and "hashishi" would have been the 435th word instead of the 434th, (434 = "delet", door) and "b'hibaram" (Genesis 2:4) would have been the 475th word instead of the 474th (474 = "da'at ", knowledge)

This being the big mystery.

As usually, you make up excuses for your DOUBLE STANDARD. When I do exactly the same thing as you with a Hebrew word, you reject it. I didn't do exactly the same.

That is not true. I account for both values 373 and 443.

John 1:1 should have read then:

καὶ ὁ θεὸς ἦν ὁ λόγος

or:

καὶ θεὸς ἦν λόγος

But ir is all nonsense.

Yet John alludes to Genesis 1:1 with Ἐν ἀρχῇ, which stands for "b'reishit"

Ἐν ἀρχῇ ἦν ὁ λόγος,= "b'reishit hayah hadavar"

continues with:

καὶ ὁ λόγος ἦν πρὸς τὸν θεόν

πρὸς denoting direction, to, towards

I understand as "inward", denoting the inner meaning of the word.

John 1:14 "and the word became flesh" - it was explained.

Hebrew "teivah" = ark (of Noach), basket (in which baby Moses was lain), means also word as written with letters.
The ark of Noach had measures 300 x 50 x 30 cubits, values that spell the word "lashon" = language, tongue.

Tongue is flesh.

Holy tongue = Hebrew.
Tongues like as of fire = holy spirit (Acts 2) which seems to be cognate to "the flame of fire", "labbat-esh" , of Exodus 3:2.

You just make up random stuff that is totally meaningless like "ed" and then build huge speculations out of nothing. My work is solid and advanced. Your work is like a child playing with finger paint drawing random squiggles.
oh boy

God did not make Eve from a rib. Eve didn't even exist. It's all part of the story. The story may have a deep meaning, but it's nothing like what you are Christians think. so 1 rib is not equal to 10 Eves?

You don't understand something that basic? The passover lamb was a symbol of Christ's flesh. "Christ our passover has been sacrificed for us."

I thought it was about the blood of the lamb ...

They are both Greek words with the value 19 x 19 which relates to the idea of manifestation and flesh in both Greek and Hebrew. manifestation and flesh :confused:

How did I "seek" that identity? ok, you found it.

Of course not. You don't see anything you don't want to see. That goes for everyone, ain't it? Also for you.

Perfect. Now you display your gross ignorance for all to see. The name of the letter Quf = 186 = maqom (place) = Golgotha (Greek) = the place where the flesh (19 x 19) of Christ was crucified

I didn't know his flesh was crucified. Was he first killed and next his corpse nailed to the cross?

I don't think you are sorry at all.
I am sorry for you.

Richard Amiel McGough

09-25-2012, 12:36 PM

And you missed my point. The connection is between the number 430 which is the value of nomos and the mention of nomos in the same verse. If Paul did not do it consciously, then some other process was involved, or it was a mere coincidence.
So you admit that your Greek gematria is just nonsense?

No, but your comments are.

That's the primary problem with all your gematria. You have no way to discern between chance and design. You just cherry pick numbers and words that you can force to fit your preconceived ideas. It is pure foolishness.
I think this applies to yourself.

That's because you have chosen to ignore the evidence in favor of your fantasies.

I have proven that your assertions are logically incoherent and ridiculously inconsistent. You make assertions based on words that not written, such as "ed", and then reject my assertions if I do anything that is even superficially similar. Your mind is broken. Kaput.

I didn't "throw away the ho from logos."
I meant the letter "hey" from the word "hashishi", the 434th word of the Hebrew bible,

That's a perfect example of your inconsistency. You have invented a huge fantasy by changing the words written in the Bible, and then attack me if I do anything even superficially similar.

the Logos Holograph was your own invention ...

No it is not. It is a representation of the actual alphanumeric structure of Hebrews 4:12. You comment indicates a total ignorance of the most basic facts of what we are discussing. How is it possible that you could utter such absurdities?

Again you do compare Hebrew with Greek gematria, for which you have no allowance.
And there is not any sense in it either.

There are no "rules" that prohibit comparison of Greek and Hebrew words. And since I have proven that there is much coherence, and you have not and cannot refute a word I wrote, your words are nothing but empty assertion. Mindless blather based on bias and ignorance.

I made it plausible,

"tov", good, with gematria 17, is the 153rd word of the bible; 153 being triangle 17.
It wouldn't have been the 153rd word when the earth had brought forth "ets pri oseh pri" (fruit tree making fruit) instead of "ets oseh pri" (tree making fruit). Tehn it would have been the 154th word, and "hashishi" would have been the 435th word instead of the 434th, (434 = "delet", door) and "b'hibaram" (Genesis 2:4) would have been the 475th word instead of the 474th (474 = "da'at ", knowledge)

This being the big mystery.

So what? Your whole system is based on words not written. But then you attack me if I do the same thing. You are totally incoherent.

I didn't do exactly the same.

Yes you did. You do it constantly. And I've proven it a dozen times but you just ignore the truth and do it again. It makes you look totally deluded.

John 1:1 should have read then:

καὶ ὁ θεὸς ἦν ὁ λόγος

or:

καὶ θεὸς ἦν λόγος

There you go again - declaring what the Bible "should have said." You have no "allowance" to make such assertions.

You just make up random stuff that is totally meaningless like "ed" and then build huge speculations out of nothing. My work is solid and advanced. Your work is like a child playing with finger paint drawing random squiggles.
oh boy

That's right. You can't understand, let alone refute, a word I write because it is way over your head but you reject it because you like playing with your finger paint.

so 1 rib is not equal to 10 Eves?

Why do you pretend to be so stupid? Or are you not pretending? :eek:

How did I "seek" that identity?
ok, you found it.

Duh. And I found it in CONTEXT:
John 19:37 And again another scripture saith, They shall look on him whom they pierced. 38 And after this Joseph of Arimathaea, being a disciple of Jesus, but secretly for fear of the Jews, besought Pilate that he might take away the body of Jesus: and Pilate gave him leave. He came therefore, and took the body of Jesus.

http://www.biblewheel.com/images/Body2869.gif
The fact that the Greek value of the Body of Jesus is exactly the same as the value of the prophecy in Hebrew is a stunning coincidence. You reject it merely because it contradicts your crazy and unjustified beliefs.

Of course not. You don't see anything you don't want to see.
That goes for everyone, ain't it? Also for you.

Absolutely not. It only goes for people who have yet to learn the value of truth. I know the value of truth and am totally open to evidence that contradicts my beliefs. That's pretty obvious since I used to believe that the Bible was true, but now I think it contains a lot of falsehood and I reject Yahweh as the true God. My beliefs were strong because I had LOTS of evidence that no one could prove wrong, such as the Bible Wheel and gematria. That evidence still stands, but now I realize it does not imply what I thought it implied. This proves that I change my mind in light of evidence. And it also proves that the Bible Wheel and gematria is good evidence since I would have rejected that along with the Bible if it were false. And every time you attack the Bible Wheel and gematria you only prove its validity because NOT ONE OF YOUR ARGUMENTS works! But I wish they did work. Then I could toss the Bible Wheel and be done with it. But it is as strong as ever. No one has ever been able to show anything that shakes its foundation. I wish you would try harder. You've been attacking it for years but you just can't form a rational argument. Oh well ... guess I'm stuck with it for a while yet. I just need to reinterpret what it means.

I didn't know his flesh was crucified. Was he first killed and next his corpse nailed to the cross?

Again, I must ask Why are your pretending to be so stupid? The word "flesh" does not mean "dead." :dizzy:

I am sorry for you.
That's because I live in the light of truth and truth is fatal to your fantasies.

Richard Amiel McGough

09-25-2012, 02:18 PM

"tov", good, with gematria 17, is the 153rd word of the bible; 153 being triangle 17.
It wouldn't have been the 153rd word when the earth had brought forth "ets pri oseh pri" (fruit tree making fruit) instead of "ets oseh pri" (tree making fruit). Tehn it would have been the 154th word, and "hashishi" would have been the 435th word instead of the 434th, (434 = "delet", door) and "b'hibaram" (Genesis 2:4) would have been the 475th word instead of the 474th (474 = "da'at ", knowledge)

This being the big mystery.

Yeah, and what would have happened if the name YHVH Elohim had been used instead of only Elohim in Genesis 1? It would have changed everything. This exposes the absurdity of your entire methodology. You invent "would haves" and then make up speculative fantasies that are based on nothing but mist like "ed."

sylvius

09-26-2012, 12:01 AM

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

Not your own invention?

It looks impressive; maybe that's why you're impelled to think it is not your own construction.

But look at how you come to the equation "Beyt El"= "Ho Logos".

It is just absurd, you fool yourself.

Same goes for your biblewheel.

sylvius

09-26-2012, 01:05 AM

Yeah, and what would have happened if the name YHVH Elohim had been used instead of only Elohim in Genesis 1? It would have changed everything. This exposes the absurdity of your entire methodology. You invent "would haves" and then make up speculative fantasies that are based on nothing but mist like "ed."

which shows you dind't get it

sylvius

09-26-2012, 02:03 AM

Galatians 3;

16 Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made. He saith not, And to seeds, as of many; but as of one, And to thy seed, which is Christ.

17 And this I say, that the covenant, that was confirmed before of God in Christ, the law, which was four hundred and thirty years after, cannot disannul, that it should make the promise of none effect.

proves that Paul didn't take the four hundred years of Genesis 15:13 literal.

13. And He said to Abram, "You shall surely know that your seed will be strangers in a land that is not theirs, and they will enslave them and oppress them, for four hundred years.

That's very interesting.

It was about the 400 years from the birth of Isaac till the exodus.

Which was 500 years after the birth of Abraham.

Showing the 1:4 ratio that is also in the two trees of paradise, and in the word "ed" of Genesis 2:5.

Fourhundred = אַרְבַּע מֵאוֹת, "arba m'ot"; אַרְבַּע, "arba", gematria 273 = 21 x 13, like of רֶגַע, "rega", Paul's indivisble moment (1Corinthians 15:51-52), which again was about "yom kippur" which is today.

Genesis 15 follows the account of the "mother of all wars", the war of the four kings against the five, where Abraham gained victory in favor of the five, "sitting at God's right hand" (after Pslams 110:1), i.e. with help of his 318 trained servants = Eliezer = NT Lazarus = Jesus's beloved disciple (who was at Jesus's chest like Jesus was at the chest of the father. )

Which makes also likely that Jacob indeed renamed Luz out of gematrial considerations.

Richard Amiel McGough

09-26-2012, 10:04 AM

Not your own invention?

It looks impressive; maybe that's why you're impelled to think it is not your own construction.

But look at how you come to the equation "Beyt El"= "Ho Logos".

It is just absurd, you fool yourself.

Same goes for your biblewheel.

Yes, let's look at how I came to that equation .... :sCo_hmmthink:.... I came to the equation "Beyt El"= "Ho Logos" by noting that "Beyt El"= 443 = "Ho Logos". How could anyone fail to see that? How can you be such a moron as to not understand something so plain and obvious? It is a simple identity. What is wrong with your brain?

The connection between the Word and the Second Letter Bet is deep and profound. The Logos Holograph coheres with the symbolic meaning of the Second Letter Bet and archetypes subsumed in the Numerical Category defined by the Number 2 such as Duality, Division, Image, Reflection, THE WORD, The Son (Ben = Bey KeyWord) of God who is the Image of God and the Word of God. The coherence is profound, deep, and highly intelligent. You can't refute a word I write, so you mock yourself and make yourself look like a moron by asserting that it is all "absurd" when you can't articulate a REASON why! That's why your comment is absurd. You have been making the same ludicrous assertion for five years, but you have NEVER been able to give any REASON for your assertion! You are just an empty babbler spewing mindless gibberish.

If the Logos Holograph and the Bible Wheel really were absurd, you'd be able to explain why. But you can't do that! You're like a lunatic in an asylum banging his head against the wall for five years saying "... it's absurd, it's absurd, it's absurd, it's absurd, it's absurd, it's absurd ..." while you are utterly incapable of expressing any REASON for your assertion. If anything is absurd, it is your comment sylvius.

Now the fact is that it would be GREAT if you could help free me from the Holographs and the Bible Wheel by showing WHY they are "absurd" because then I could reject them just as I have rejected belief in Yahweh and the Bible. But you can't do that, can you? You are simply too stupid and inarticulate to actually state any REASON I should think them absurd. So your comments don't help in any way at all. They are completely void of any intelligence.

What a pity.

Richard Amiel McGough

09-26-2012, 10:06 AM

sylvius

09-26-2012, 10:26 AM

Yes, let's look at how I came to that equation .... :sCo_hmmthink:.... I came to the equation "Beyt El"= "Ho Logos" by noting that "Beyt El"= 443 = "Ho Logos". No, you suggest with your Logos Holograph that you came to it via Hebrews 4:12, 412 being gematria of "beit".
That's absurd.
Every book of the bible has a verse 4:12.
And more: What is the sense of "The word is the house of God"? John 1:1 has " God was the word" and not "The house of God was the word".
And more: You can't compare/equate Hebrew with Greek gematria.
Hebrew "hadavar" has gematria 211...

The connection between the Word and the Second Letter Bet is deep and profound. and what about the Alef?

If the Logos Holograph and the Bible Wheel really were absurd, you'd be able to explain why.
You did press the bible into a 22-spoke wheel, just because the gematria of "gilgal" coincides the number of 66 books of the protestant bible and 3 times the number of letters in the Hebrew alphabet; next we had to admit that it "nicely fits"; but it says nothing and has no sense at all.

sylvius

09-26-2012, 11:10 AM

On the contrary, I totally "got it." You build fantasies out of mist (ed)! :lmbo:

Nothing could be more obvious.

http://www.inner.org/string/string.htm

Four Forces from One

The ratio 1:4 ("one to four" or "one becoming four") is one of the pillars of creation as revealed in the beginning of the Torah. We will here observe four phenomena from Genesis based upon the ratio 1:4.

The two letters alef (= 1) and dalet (= 4) form together the word for "vapor." In the beginning of creation, the "vapor" rose from the earth to moisten the earth for the sake of the creation of man.

One river flows from Eden to the garden, which thereafter, leaving the garden, divides into the four great rivers of the earth.

"The Tree of Life" (etz ha'chaim) = 233. "The Tree of Knowledge of good and evil" (etz hada'at tov v'rah) = 932. 932 = 4 times 233. Thus the ratio of the two trees is "one to four" (the "one" being the Tree of Life and the resulting "four" being the Tree of Knowledge of good and evil).

The word "good" (tov, the positive force of the Tree of Knowledge of good and evil) = 17. The word "life" (chaim, of the Tree of Life) = 68. 17:68 = 1:4. The word for "life" possesses four letters. The average value of each of its letters is "good." Thus we see that the fundamental force of "life" (of the Tree of Life) is in fact the positive force of "good" (inherent in the Tree of Knowledge of good and evil). The two trees thus create an infinite cycle of Divine energy.

To conclude, the most obvious phenomenon in the Torah related to the four forces of nature deriving from one, is that God's essential Name Havayah is composed of four letters. "God is One." In the future it will become revealed that "God is One and His Name is One." "His Name" refers to the four letters of Havayah. This is the ultimate revelation of the Divine "unified field theory."

Richard Amiel McGough

09-26-2012, 11:17 AM

No, you suggest with your Logos Holograph that you came to it via Hebrews 4:12, 412 being gematria of "beit".
That's absurd.
Every book of the bible has a verse 4:12.
And more: What is the sense of "The word is the house of God"? John 1:1 has " God was the word" and not "The house of God was the word".
And more: You can't compare/equate Hebrew with Greek gematria.
Hebrew "hadavar" has gematria 211...

Excellent! :clap2:

You did it sylvius! You gave a REASON for your assertions! Well done! :thumb:

The crowd is going wild!

:cheerleader5:

Now let's look at the reasons you gave.

1) you suggest with your Logos Holograph that you came to it via Hebrews 4:12, 412 being gematria of "beit". That's absurd.

OK - I see your misunderstanding. I never said that I "came to it via Hebrews 4:12." I said that the verse number is the same as the value of Bet, and that this seems significant because the holograph is based entirely on concepts related to the symbolic meaning of Bet = 412 => 4:12 and the phrase Bet El = 443 = Ho Logos which is an alphanumeric relation that forms another CONNECTION between Bet, the Word, and the Holograph. It's really very simple. There are many meaningful connections within this one passage. I don't have to make up anything or go cherry picking here and there to find things that "fit" some preconceived idea - all these concepts and connections coherently converge in the holograph. It is this kind of "super intelligent super coherence" that is so impressive. As I've shown, it runs very very deep throughout the entire holograph in a way that implies deep intelligence. So if you want to refute it, you will have to have sufficient intelligence to understand why intelligent and informed people would see it as significant. Now it could be that I am deluded and there really is no intelligence shown in the Holograph. But if that is the case, then you should be able to EXPLAIN WHY just like you attempted in your last message.

2) And more: What is the sense of "The word is the house of God"? John 1:1 has " God was the word" and not "The house of God was the word".

Oh ... I'm sorry to see you feigning ignorance again. That has been your primary tactic throughout all our conversations. You know perfectly well that the Hebrew letters are SYMBOLS and that it would be absurd to say that the House of God "is" the Word just as it would be absurd to say that God is an "ox" because he is represented by the Letter Aleph, as explained by Rabbi Munk in his "Wisdom of the Hebrew Alphabet" who I quoted in my article Aleph - A Symbol of God, Origins, and First Things (http://www.biblewheel.com/Wheel/Spokes/Aleph_Origins.asp):
Rabbi Munk: Aleph represents the One and Only, the Eternal, the Omnipotent God. It is the symbol of God as the Creator and Master of the Universe. ... Even the name aleph â€“ because it is related to alluph [master] â€“ alludes to the sovereignty of God.

The absurdity of your assertion is obvious to everyone reading this thread because you routinely use the symbolic meaning of the letters in your comments. But now you pretend you don't understand the symbolic meaning of the Hebrew letters? Give us a break!

3) And more: You can't compare/equate Hebrew with Greek gematria.

Anyone can "compare" anything they want. Comparison is what shows if there is or is not a connection. The fact that the comparisons with Hebrew and Greek gematria reveal profound and highly intelligent thematic and alphanumeric connections proves that your comment is false.

I think it is GREAT that you are trying to find rational reasons to reject my work, but I do wish you would try a little harder to find a legitimate criticism that would stand up under scrutiny.

Richard Amiel McGough

09-26-2012, 11:43 AM

The connection between the Word and the Second Letter Bet is deep and profound.
and what about the Alef?

I already explained that to you more than once, but you just ignored what I said. But that's OK - I don't mind explaining again.

The letter Aleph represents God (Aleph KeyWord Elohim), and the three Persons of the Trinity are represented by the first three letters:

Aleph represents the Father (Aleph KeyWord Av).
Bet represents the Son (Bet KeyWord Ben)
Gimel represents the Holly Spirit (Gimel KeyWord Gomel = Abundant Giver)

The coherence is really quite stunning. I explain this in my Spoke 3 article on The Holy Trinity (http://www.biblewheel.com/Wheel/Spokes/Gimel_Trinity.asp) where I also show that the first three books of the Torah follow the pattern of the Trinity and the first three letters of the Hebrew Alphabet:

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

We see a similar pattern in the Unity Holograph (http://www.biblewheel.com/GR/GR_Unity.asp) (Shema) which is based on the values of the Divine Names YHVH and Elohim, but is completed only if we include the Greek title of God, Ho Pater (The Father):

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

I would be very interested to know if you can find any criticism of the Unity Holograph. It is based entirely on the Hebrew except the one Divine Name that can be found only in the Greek. The sum of the Shema = 1118 = 2 x 13 x 43. There are three possible products of pairs of those three numbers. Two are the values of Hebrew Divine Names YHVH = 2 x 13 and Elohim = 2 x 43. The third product 13 x 43 is not the value of any Hebrew name or title of God, but it is the value of the primary Greek title of God used in the NT, namely, Ho Pater (The Father) = 559 = 13 x 43:

Prime Factors

Value
Meaning
Person

13 (http://www.biblewheel.com/GR/GR_13.asp)
-
43 (http://www.biblewheel.com/GR/GR_43.asp)
559 (http://www.biblewheel.com/GR/GR_559.asp)
The Father (Ho Pater)
Father

13 (http://www.biblewheel.com/GR/GR_13.asp)
2 (http://www.biblewheel.com/Wheel/Spokes/Beyt_Division.asp)
-
26 (http://www.biblewheel.com/GR/GR_26.asp)
The Lord (YHVH)
Son

-
2 (http://www.biblewheel.com/Wheel/Spokes/Beyt_Division.asp)
43 (http://www.biblewheel.com/GR/GR_43.asp)
86 (http://www.biblewheel.com/GR/GR_86.asp)
God (Elohim)
Holy Spirit

13

2
43
1118
Sum of Shema = One x God
GODHEAD

Thus the Trinity is naturally coherent with the Shema. That is a most amazing fact. If you can't see the coherence and completeness of these facts, then you are simply blind. If you want to refute these facts, you will have to DEAL WITH THESE FACTS. If you merely assert that they are "absurd" you will only be revealing the absurdity of your own mind.

You did press the bible into a 22-spoke wheel, just because the gematria of "gilgal" coincides the number of 66 books of the protestant bible and 3 times the number of letters in the Hebrew alphabet; next we had to admit that it "nicely fits"; but it says nothing and has no sense at all.
There you go again ... you simply assert that "it makes no sense at all" but you can't articulate a REASON it makes no sense.

Your assertion that I "pressed the bible into a 22-spoke wheel" is blatantly absurd because the word "press" implies I used force when it is self-evident that it requires no "force" to simply place the 66 books in a 22-spoke wheel. Thus your assertion reveals more of your mindless absurdity. But it is much worse than that because you are willfully ignoring the fact that the Sepher Yetzirah says that God put the Hebrew alphabet "in a circle" (galgal = 66) and so we see that the alphabetic circle is directly and naturally connected with the 66 books that form it. Anyone with any intelligence can see that this is a rather striking "coincidence" that required no "force" to make it work.

And your comments are blatantly false. I discovered the Bible Wheel BEFORE discovering that galgal = 66. That's why it knocked my socks off. It was a stunning "coincidence" that confirmed what I had already discovered.

Finally, your assertion that it "makes no sense at all" is blatantly absurd and reveals that you have chosen to blind yourself to things that anyone with any intelligence can easily see. There are profound correlations with the meaning of the Hebrew letters and the books on the corresponding Spokes. I wrote a 412 page book explaining all this. I could have written a 412,000 page book if I had time since there is no limit to the patterns. So if you want to press your assertion that the Bible Wheel is absurd, you will have to give REASONS that actually have some intelligence.

Good luck with that! :p

sylvius

09-26-2012, 11:55 AM

. I never said that I "came to it via Hebrews 4:12."
you suggested it:

http://i138.photobucket.com/albums/q262/suivlys/LogosHolopgraph.jpg -

It is this kind of "super intelligent super coherence" that is so impressive. As I've shown, it runs very very deep throughout the entire holograph in a way that implies deep intelligence

you are impressed by your own "super deep intelligence" that shows the "super coherence"

So if you want to refute it, you will have to have sufficient intelligence to understand why intelligent and informed people would see it as significant. Are there any?

. I'm sorry to see you feigning ignorance again. That has been your primary tactic throughout all our conversations.
It was meant to show you something.

Genesis 28:19
And he named the place Beth El, but Luz was orignally the name of the city.

The reason why he named it Beth El that is given in the previous verses:

Genesis 28:16-17,
And Jacob awakened from his sleep, and he said, " Indeed, the Lord is in this place, and I did not know [it]. And he was frightened, and he said, "How awesome is this place! This is none other than the house of God, and this is the gate of heaven."

Indeed, the Lord is in this place = אָכֵן יֵשׁ יְ־הֹוָ־ה בַּמָּקוֹם הַזֶּה, "achen yesh hashem bamakom hazeh" --

We know that place too, don't we? It is exactly where creation is completed, Genesis 1:31.

"This is none other than the house of God and this is the gate of heaven" -- "hashishi" being 434th word.

The miracle of time is that, although time seems endless, millions and millions of years have passed, and millions and millions, or billions and billions, have yet to come, we do live now , even in computer-age.

sylvius

09-26-2012, 12:36 PM

Richard Amiel McGough

09-26-2012, 01:48 PM

you suggest with your Logos Holograph that you came to it via Hebrews 4:12, 412 being gematria of "beit".

1) you suggest with your Logos Holograph that you came to it via Hebrews 4:12, 412 being gematria of "beit". That's absurd.

OK - I see your misunderstanding. I never said that I "came to it via Hebrews 4:12." I said that the verse number is the same as the value of Bet, and that this seems significant because the holograph is based entirely on concepts related to the symbolic meaning of Bet = 412 => 4:12 and the phrase Bet El = 443 = Ho Logos which is an alphanumeric relation that forms another CONNECTION between Bet, the Word, and the Holograph. It's really very simple. There are many meaningful connections within this one passage. I don't have to make up anything or go cherry picking here and there to find things that "fit" some preconceived idea - all these concepts and connections coherently converge in the holograph. It is this kind of "super intelligent super coherence" that is so impressive. As I've shown, it runs very very deep throughout the entire holograph in a way that implies deep intelligence. So if you want to refute it, you will have to have sufficient intelligence to understand why intelligent and informed people would see it as significant. Now it could be that I am deluded and there really is no intelligence shown in the Holograph. But if that is the case, then you should be able to EXPLAIN WHY just like you attempted in your last message.

you suggested it:

http://i138.photobucket.com/albums/q262/suivlys/LogosHolopgraph.jpg -

Is there no end to the mindless one-line absurdities you spew out? I did not "suggest it." Read the answer I gave. If you disagree with it, give an ANSWER that relates to what I wrote. Sheesh.

you are impressed by your own "super deep intelligence" that shows the "super coherence"

Yes, just like I was impressed with the super-deep intelligence of Quantum Physics that I studied in my Ph.D. program.

You would do well to begin to be impressed by intelligence. As it is, you seem totally enamored by moronism. You have never engaged me in rational discourse. All you do is spew out random incoherent fragments of sentences. It's truly pathetic.

Richard Amiel McGough

09-26-2012, 02:04 PM

I already explained that to you more than once, but you just ignored what I said. But that's OK - I don't mind explaining again.

The letter Aleph represents God (Aleph KeyWord Elohim), and the three Persons of the Trinity are represented by the first three letters:

Aleph represents the Father (Aleph KeyWord Av).
Bet represents the Son (Bet KeyWord Ben)
Gimel represents the Holly Spirit (Gimel KeyWord Gomel = Abundant Giver)

It is quite simple counting;

10 = 1 + 2+ 3 + 4

OIW Unity is triangular.

But that doens't mean that "Bet represents the son".

"alef" is written as two letters "yud" combined and/or divided by a "vav".

So you might think the fracture is in the "vav", but also the healing.

"gimel", there must be a relation with the third day (with the double "ki-tov").

And of course with the camel that goes through the needles eye, ("kuf hamachat" has gematria 248, like also the name Abraham, etc.)

Your comments have nothing to do with the answer I gave to your question. Your comments are totally non sequitur as usual. Why can't you post anything that makes any sense or that even relates to the flow of the conversation?

The third product 13 x 43 is not the value of any Hebrew name or title of God, but it is the value of the primary Greek title of God used in the NT, namely, Ho Pater (The Father) = 559 = 13 x 43:

that's the Achilles-heel :winking0071:

On the contrary, that is a powerful example of how Greek and Hebrew gematria cohere in a most amazing away.

And since you are utterly incapable of forming anything like a refutation, you comment is utterly meaningless and absurd.

I see no message,

Of course not! You can't even WRITE a coherent message.

Your assertion that I "pressed the bible into a 22-spoke wheel" is blatantly absurd because the word "press" implies I used force when it is self-evident that it requires no "force" to simply place the 66 books in a 22-spoke wheel.
They have to fit, even in their canonical order.

No they don't. If the canonical order were different, the patterns would be ruined. This is proof that there is an authentic, meaningful pattern. If you changed the order of the books you would ruin the pattern. I call this the Bible Wheel Challenge (http://www.biblewheel.com/Apologetics/BWChallenge.asp):
THE BIBLE WHEEL CHALLENGE asserts that the Christian canon is truly perfect in the twofold sense that 1) no rearrangement of its books would improve upon the patterns discovered on the Bible Wheel, and 2) any rearrangement would cause an obvious degradation of existing patterns. The challenge is for the opponent to suggest a rearrangement and present arguments for why such a change would produce patterns equal to or superior to those presently seen in the Bible Wheel. This challenge simultaneously proves the invincibility of the Bible Wheel even as it demonstrates the vacuity of the skeptics canard that "patterns mean nothing because they can be found in anything." It is an extremely powerful challenge because it can not be refuted without interacting with the data, and the data is the touchstone that proves the Bible Wheel.

If your assertions were true, you could prove it instantly by simply taking the Bible Wheel Challenge. But you can't do that because all your words are ignorant and vain.

I discovered the Bible Wheel BEFORE discovering that galgal = 66.
How then you discovered it?

I was studying the symbolic meanings of the Hebrew letters and how they relate to ideas in the Bible. I knew about the idea that God put the letters in a circle (from the Sepher Yetzirah) and that it would be an interesting way to record my observations. So I put everything relating to Aleph on Spoke 1, everything relating to Bet on Spoke 2, and so forth. I would include things like the First Commandment with Aleph, the Second with Bet, etc, and likewise the Days of Creation, the Seven Seals of Revelation, and so on and so forth. One day I noticed that the theme of Creation in Genesis goes naturally with Aleph, and the theme of building the Beyt-YHVH with Exodus, and so forth, and the idea to correlate the books with the letters just popped into my head. When I noticed only 22 books would fit, I realized I could continue like in a spiral. Then I thought that three cycles in a closed circle looked better, so that's what I settled on. Simple as that. No "forcing" anything in any way at all. In essence, all I did was "roll up" the traditional list of 66 books on a spindle wheel representing the 22 Hebrew letters. Nothing could be simpler. Everything - the hundreds of pages on this site and the 412 pages of my book - followed from this singular act.

http://www.biblewheel.com/intro/images/Scrollonscroll_640.gif

sylvius

09-26-2012, 11:36 PM

Is there no end to the mindless one-line absurdities you spew out? I did not "suggest it."
Same kind of thing you did with John 1:14 in your "The Grace Manifest Holograph"

Yes, just like I was impressed with the super-deep intelligence of Quantum Physics that I studied in my Ph.D. program.
Are you looking out for the most high God, of whom Malki Tsedek was priest?

You would do well to begin to be impressed by intelligence. As it is, you seem totally enamored by moronism. You have never engaged me in rational discourse. All you do is spew out random incoherent fragments of sentences. It's truly pathetic.
Intelligence ain't the same as rationality.

sylvius

09-27-2012, 12:10 AM

Your comments have nothing to do with the answer I gave to your question. Your comments are totally non sequitur as usual. Why can't you post anything that makes any sense or that even relates to the flow of the conversation?
Maybe I am just too stupid for it.

Trinity is about two separate things joined together, I thought.

On the contrary, that is a powerful example of how Greek and Hebrew gematria cohere in a most amazing away.
It's just that it fits in your stall (sorry, Holograph).

And since you are utterly incapable of forming anything like a refutation, you comment is utterly meaningless and absurd.
All of your work is grotesque and abdurd, and the most frappant thing is that you don't know yourself, that you on the contrary think it is an expression of "super-intelligence" that inheres you.

No they don't. If the canonical order were different, the patterns would be ruined.
This is proof that there is an authentic, meaningful pattern. If you changed the order of the books you would ruin the pattern.
Which means that if Mark was standing in the place of John all of your Biblewheel-project was to go wrong (In Dutch we have a more fitting expression for that). OIW Mark has to stand in the place where he stands. He may not run away, like the young man did, leaving his linen cloth.

I was studying the symbolic meanings of the Hebrew letters and how they relate to ideas in the Bible. I knew about the idea that God put the letters in a circle (from the Sepher Yetzirah) and that it would be an interesting way to record my observations. So I put everything relating to Aleph on Spoke 1, everything relating to Bet on Spoke 2, and so forth.
How you determined things relating to Aleph instead of to Bet and so forth?

One day I noticed that the theme of Creation in Genesis goes naturally with Aleph, How? why?

and the theme of building the Beyt-YHVH with Exodus You mean the building of the tabernacle?

and the idea to correlate the books with the letters just popped into my head. were you stoned?

When I noticed only 22 books would fit, I realized I could continue like in a spiral. Then I thought that three cycles in a closed circle looked better, so that's what I settled on. Simple as that. No "forcing" anything in any way at all. In essence, all I did was "roll up" the traditional list of 66 books on a spindle wheel representing the 22 Hebrew letters. Nothing could be simpler.

Not so simple at all to roll up 66 books on a spindle wheel. ...

But you did roll them up by book-number, not by page, so that's not a real rolling up.

Everything - the hundreds of pages on this site and the 412 pages of my book - followed from this singular act. Is it just coincidence that the number of pages conincides with versenumber Hebrews 4.12, or is it designed ?

Richard Amiel McGough

09-27-2012, 12:45 PM

Same kind of thing you did with John 1:14 in your "The Grace Manifest Holograph"

I didn't "do" anything but note points that naturally cohere.

Intelligence ain't the same as rationality.
True. Rationality is a necessary but not sufficient condition for intelligence.

Richard Amiel McGough

09-27-2012, 01:02 PM

Maybe I am just too stupid for it.

I doubt that. You are just too stubborn and biased to use the intelligence you have.

Trinity is about two separate things joined together, I thought.

You thought wrong. The Trinity is about UNITY of the three Persons of the Godhead.

It's just that it fits in your stall (sorry, Holograph).

Another brain dead comment.

All of your work is grotesque and abdurd, and the most frappant thing is that you don't know yourself, that you on the contrary think it is an expression of "super-intelligence" that inheres you.

If that were true, you could prove it. But you can't. All you do is spew empty assertions and mindless bullshit.

Which means that if Mark was standing in the place of John all of your Biblewheel-project was to go wrong (In Dutch we have a more fitting expression for that). OIW Mark has to stand in the place where he stands. He may not run away, like the young man did, leaving his linen cloth.

False again. You don't even understand your own words. You can move Mark where ever you want. But if you do, you will destroy the existing patterns and not create better patterns, and this proves that the patterns that exist are optimal. But you can't understand this simple logic because you have chosen to be utterly irrational.

How you determined things relating to Aleph instead of to Bet and so forth?

There are lots of ways. If you knew anything about this topic, you would know that the Talmud and the Zohar explain the meanings of the letters and associated ideas. I can't believe how utterly ignorant you are of these basic facts. No wonder you don't understand my work. You are as dumb as a rock.

and the theme of building the Beyt-YHVH with Exodus
You mean the building of the tabernacle?

Yes. The first occurrence of "Beyt-YHVH" is in Exodus, and the last third of the book is devoted to the design and building of the tabernacle which was the "house of the Lord" (Beyt YHVH). Thus, a major theme of the Second Book natural coheres with the meaning of the Second Letter Bet.

Not so simple at all to roll up 66 books on a spindle wheel. ...

It was the simplest thing in the world. You would deny that you have two legs if you thought it would validate something I said. Your bias is absurd beyond all description. You are a true psycho freak.

When I noticed only 22 books would fit, I realized I could continue like in a spiral. Then I thought that three cycles in a closed circle looked better, so that's what I settled on. Simple as that. No "forcing" anything in any way at all. In essence, all I did was "roll up" the traditional list of 66 books on a spindle wheel representing the 22 Hebrew letters. Nothing could be simpler.
But you did roll them up by book-number, not by page, so that's not a real rolling up.

You failed to read what I wrote. I said I "rolled up the traditional LIST of 66 books" not "by the page." Your moronism runs deeper than any ocean. You are a true psycho freak.

sylvius

09-27-2012, 01:06 PM

I didn't "do" anything but note points that naturally cohere.

You related versenumber 1:14 to gematria 114 of "chanun", and therefore called it "The Grace Manifest Holograph"

Richard Amiel McGough

09-27-2012, 01:09 PM

I didn't "do" anything but note points that naturally cohere.
You related versenumber 1:14 to gematria 114 of "chanun", and therefore called it "The Grace Manifest Holograph"

Duh. That is a point that naturally coheres. Can you tie your shoes? Who feeds you? Are you in a mental institution?

sylvius

09-27-2012, 01:39 PM

You thought wrong. The Trinity is about UNITY of the three Persons of the Godhead.

The spirit combining father and son, God and man.

If that were true, you could prove it.
If you say "that door is red", while it is blue, there is no argument that will convince you.

False again. You don't even understand your own words. You can move Mark where ever you want. But if you do, you will destroy the existing patterns what existing patterns?

and not create better patterns which was not my intention.,

and this proves that the patterns that exist are optimal. what a laugh.

There are lots of ways. If you knew anything about this topic, you would know that the Talmud and the Zohar explain the meanings of the letters and associated ideas.
They never say : Genesis = Aleph; Exodus = Bet ; Leviticus = Gimel; Numbers = Dalet; Deuternomy = Hey" .

IT IS NONSENSE, Richard.

Yet they can be called "First book of Moses, second book of Moses, third book of Moses, fourth book of Moses, fifth book of Moses"
but Joshua is not the sixth book of Moses.

Yes. The first occurrence of "Beyt-YHVH" is in Exodus Wasn't it in Genesis 28? (Before already in Genesis12)?

and the last third of the book is devoted to the design and building of the tabernacle which was the "house of the Lord" (Beyt YHVH). I thought it was called "mishkan".

Thus, a major theme of the Second Book natural coheres with the meaning of the Second Letter Bet.
The word "bayit" occurs much more in the book of Genesis than in the book of Exodus.
"The house of the Lord your God" occurs two times in Exodus.

You failed to read what I wrote. I said I "rolled up the traditional LIST of 66 books" not "by the page." Your moronism runs deeper than any ocean. You are a true psycho freak.

a closet-roll with 66 sheets.

Richard Amiel McGough

09-27-2012, 01:39 PM

Everything - the hundreds of pages on this site and the 412 pages of my book - followed from this singular act.
Is it just coincidence that the number of pages conincides with versenumber Hebrews 4.12, or is it designed ?
It was just a happy coincidence. The book itself ends on page 401 ( = Aleph + Tav). The endnotes take up eleven pages to give the total of 412. I was also pleased that the table of the 22 Hebrew letters happened to appear on page 22. I thought those were nice coincidences, but it certainly would not have been worth the effort to manipulate the layout of the whole book just to get a few coincidences like that. And besides, it wouldn't have worked out like that at all if I had included the introduction. But after spending a week trying to write an introduction I realized it wasn't really adding anything to the book so I decided to leave it out.

Of course, I was a Christian at the time I wrote the Bible Wheel book so I took these coincidences as a kind of sign that the book was exactly as it should have been. A kind of "seal" since the Bible Wheel is sealed by the Hebrew alphabet from Aleph to Tav (401) and the letter Bet = 412 is a symbol of the Word.

Richard Amiel McGough

09-27-2012, 02:02 PM

The spirit combining father and son, God and man.

The Trinity is about the nature of God. It has absolutely nothing to do with "God and man."

If you say "that door is red", while it is blue, there is no argument that will convince you.

If that were true, you could point to the "door" that we see differently and we could discuss it's "color." But you haven't done that. All you do is spew out empty assertions without any content.

So all you need to do is write a complete sentence or two explaining which "door" you think is "blue" and we can discuss it. Is that too hard for you?

False again. You don't even understand your own words. You can move Mark where ever you want. But if you do, you will destroy the existing patterns
what existing patterns?

You've been attacking the Bible Wheel for FIVE YEARS and you don't even know anything about it? What kind of moron are you?

what a laugh.

Yes, fools like you do nothing but laugh at things they don't understand. This verse is for you:

Ecclesiastes 7:6 For as the crackling of thorns under a pot, so is the laughter of the fool.

They never say : Genesis = Aleph; Exodus = Bet ; Leviticus = Gimel; Numbers = Dalet; Deuternomy = Hey" .

I never said they did.

IT IS NONSENSE, Richard.

And why? You can't say.

Your comments are the only nonsense in this thread. You are so inarticulate you can't even state your case. All you can do is say "goo goo ga ga" nonsense"

Yet they can be called "First book of Moses, second book of Moses, third book of Moses, fourth book of Moses, fifth book of Moses"
but Jozua is not the sixth book of Moses.

So you can't understand the idea that the themes of the books could follow the pattern of the symbolic meanings of the letters? Did they give you a lobotomy or what?

Wasn't it in Genesis 28? (Before already in Genesis12)?

Nope. First occurrence of Beyt YHVH is in Exodus 23:19. But that's not the most significant point. The most significant point is that the last third of Exodus is all about the design of the Tabernacle, which is the Beyt YHVH. It is a dominant theme of the second book and it matches the meaning of the second letter.

a closet-roll with 66 sheets.

So you continue in your error even after it has been exposed. How pathetic.

Richard Amiel McGough

09-27-2012, 02:19 PM

Talking to you is pure vanity sylvius. It's a total waste of time because your comments are ignorant and confused and wildly incoherent. If you want to challenge anything I have written about the Bible Wheel, you will have to begin with the first chapter of the Bible Wheel book and quote something I wrote and show why it is erroneous using logic and facts. It's available free online here (http://biblewheel.com/book/Chapters/Chapt01.asp). You need to begin at the beginning and indicate whether or not you agree with what I wrote. If you do not agree, then explain why using lucid prose. If you cannot find any error in Chapter 1 then you need to acknowledge that fact so we have a foundation of agreement.

sylvius

09-27-2012, 02:34 PM

sylvius

09-27-2012, 02:39 PM

The Trinity is about the nature of God. It has absolutely nothing to do with "God and man."

.

I thought it was invented to express how Jesus could have been both God and man, fully God and fully man.

But there is much agression around the Trinity, I noticed, I rather stay outside.

Richard Amiel McGough

09-27-2012, 02:47 PM

I thought it was invented to express how Jesus could have been both God and man, fully God and fully man.

But there is much agression around the Trinity, I noticed, I rather stay outside.
You are confusing two related but different theological issues.

1) The Trinity: God is Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. The Trinity existed before the Incarnation.

2) The Incarnation: Christ is both God and Man.

There is much aggression in religious topics in general, and a rather ridiculous lack of rationality.

Richard Amiel McGough

09-27-2012, 02:48 PM

I got your book at home.

You can use the online text to copy/paste quotes if you want to challenge anything I wrote.

sylvius

09-28-2012, 12:25 AM

About Habakkuk:

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

According to the Zohar (Volume 1, page 8b) Habakkuk is the boy born to the Shunamite woman through Elisha's blessing:

2Ki 4:16
And he said, About this season, according to the time of life, thou shalt embrace (חבקת - hoveket, therefore Habakkuk) a son. And she said, Nay, my lord, [thou] man of God, do not lie unto thine handmaid.

"About this season, according to the time of life"

Hebrew לַמּוֹעֵד הַזֶּה כָּעֵת חַיָּה

cf. Genesis 18:14,
Is any thing too hard for the LORD. At the set time I will return unto thee, when the season cometh round, and Sarah shall have a son.

" At the set time I will return unto thee, when the season cometh round,"
Hebrew:
לַמּוֹעֵד אָשׁוּב אֵלֶיךָ, כָּעֵת חַיָּה

It is the same expression!

There is a story about Dutch queen Wilhelmina, who was barren, that she visited Austria and had a very weird meeting with a "Wunderrebbe" (she went incognito) and the rebbe should have told her "this time next year" you will have a child.
Indeed a year later a daughter was born, the later queen Juliana.

The story is somewhere online, I'll try to find it.

sylvius

09-28-2012, 12:49 AM

I think I would explain it different than Rashi does. I think that v.2 and 3 speak about the same vision.

KJV:

And the LORD answered me, and said, Write the vision, and make it plain upon tables, that he may run that readeth it.
For the vision is yet for an appointed time, but at the end it shall speak, and not lie: though it tarry, wait for it; because it will surely come, it will not tarry.

I must study it further ..

sylvius

09-28-2012, 07:36 AM

which can be seen as refutation of your Greek gematria...

Maybe not.

Also vocals are bodily

I do remember the miss of the musicschool, how she made her lips circleround to teach us how to sing an "oh", she even let her finger circle in it.

Timmy

09-28-2012, 07:51 AM

sylvius,

Baruch Adonai Elohinu Melki Olam!

HA! WE AGREE ABOUT MUCH (?vanity?)!!!

From what scipture reveals, how could the 'Holy Spirit' be any other than the Father and Son united as one spirit, both yachid and echad.

Richard my friend,

There is no place in scripture stating G_d is 3. It was a Roman Catholic invention. . .developing after the second century. Theophilus, Tertulian, and Origen are primarily responsible for it finding it's way into confusing Xristian theology.

We do see in the N.T. this Spirit of the Holy One referenced in ways such as "The Lord is that spirit" and "the spirit of Christ," and also various inferences of the same.

With these things in mind, go back to John 14 looking at it in this light:

John 14:
6 יהושע said to him, â€œI am the Way, and THE TRUTH, and the Life. No one comes to the Father except through Me . . . 15 â€œIf you love Me, you shall guard My commands. 16 â€œAnd I shall ask the Father, and He shall give you another Helper, to stay with you forever â€“ 17 THE SPIRIT OF TRUTH, whom the world is unable to receive, because it does not see Him or know Him. But you know Him, for He stays with you and shall be in you.

18 â€œI shall not leave you orphans â€“ I AM COMING TO YOU. . ."
. . .AND SO forth; where ONWARD Yeshua continues saying that both the Father and He shall come to dwell within and around us.

If we drop the theo-babble rap ov ancient gnostiophical Helenistically inclined spin doctors and stick to the scripture as it's own compass and reference point, there is no confusion.

Besides, G_d is not the author of confusion.

G_d says, "My people shall know my name."

This being the case, if indeed this Spirit of the Holy One, the Rauch Ha'Kodesh is a separate person other than the Father and (of) the Son, what is "His" name?

Sincerely,

Timmy

Richard Amiel McGough

09-28-2012, 08:03 AM

Your book is a collector's item, a curiosity and museum piece.

How nice of you that you portrayed my notorious forefather's handgesture on the first page:

http://www.lessing-photo.com/dispimg.asp?i=40140113+&cr=4&cl=1

Only that sylvius has six fingers :eek:

What does that handgesture mean?

As far as I know, it is a standard priestly blessing. It's seen in many old representations of the Pope. What's your point?

And under there you quote Habakkuk 2:2, like if you are like him and his vision like the vision of your wheel.

You are being ridiculous, as usual. You can't refute a word I write, so you make up irrelevant crap.

Interesting is the beforegoing verse:

On my watch I will stand, and I will set myself upon a fortress, and I will look out to see what He will speak to me and what I will reply when I am reproved.

Rashi:
http://www.chabad.org/library/bible_cdo/aid/16198/showrashi/true

On my watch I will stand: Habakkuk dug a circular hole, stood within it, and said, â€œI will not budge from here until I hear what He will say to me concerning this, my question why He looks and sees the prosperity of a wicked man.â€

and what I will reply: to those who come to contend with me. :

when I am reproved: mon aprobement in O.F.; the reproach one addresses to me.
:
when I am reproved: For they reprove me to my face that one should criticize the Divine standard of justice

So Habakkuk, that's you!

You are babbling incoherently.

which can be seen as refutation of your Greek gematria...
Only to a incoherent babbler like you.

You cannot refute a word I wrote, so you spew babel.

sylvius

09-28-2012, 08:10 AM

i did by accident delete the post I only wanted to quote.
But you saved it by responding to it.

This I wanted to add to it:

About Habakkuk:

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

According to the Zohar (Volume 1, page 8b) Habakkuk is the boy born to the Shunamite woman through Elisha's blessing:

2Ki 4:16
And he said, About this season, according to the time of life, thou shalt embrace (חבקת - hoveket, therefore Habakkuk) a son. And she said, Nay, my lord, [thou] man of God, do not lie unto thine handmaid.

"About this season, according to the time of life"

Hebrew לַמּוֹעֵד הַזֶּה כָּעֵת חַיָּה

cf. Genesis 18:14,
Is any thing too hard for the LORD. At the set time I will return unto thee, when the season cometh round, and Sarah shall have a son.

" At the set time I will return unto thee, when the season cometh round,"
Hebrew:
לַמּוֹעֵד אָשׁוּב אֵלֶיךָ, כָּעֵת חַיָּה

It is the same expression!

There is a story about Dutch queen Wilhelmina, who was barren, that she visited Austria and had a very weird meeting with a "Wunderrebbe" (she went incognito) and the rebbe should have told her "this time next year" you will have a child.
Indeed a year later a daughter was born, the later queen Juliana.

The story is somewhere online, I'll try to find it.

sylvius

09-28-2012, 08:16 AM

Richard Amiel McGough

09-28-2012, 08:35 AM

z

From what scipture reveals, how could the 'Holy Spirit' be any other than the Father and Son united as one spirit, both yachid and echad.

Good morning my friend, :yo:

I agree that Twinity seems more biblical than Trinity, but numerically and euphoniously the Three trumps the Two.

Richard my friend,

There is no place in scripture stating G_d is 3. It was a Roman Catholic invention. . .developing after the second century. Theophilus, Tertulian, and Origen are primarily responsible for it finding it's way into confusing Xristian theology.

We do see in the N.T. this Spirit of the Holy One referenced in ways such as "The Lord is that spirit" and "the spirit of Christ," and also various inferences of the same.

Scripture implies many things that are not explicitly "stated." Your assertion that the Trinity is a "Roman Catholic invention" indicates a rather woeful ignorance of Christian history. It is true that Constantine played an essential role in establishing the Trinity as the official dogma, but the doctrine itself was invented by devout Christians trying to understand what the Bible says and the tradition they had received from the earlier Christians who worshiped Christ as God. They gave Biblical reasons for their conclusions. So if you want to say they are wrong, you need to deal with the arguments they gave. There was a HUGE debate on this topic amongst devout Christians, you know.

And speaking of unbiblical traditions invented by religious traditions - Why do you transmute the "o" to an underscore in G_d? Do you really think you are protecting yourself from accidentally violating the Third Commandment that way? It looks to me like a ridiculous translinguistic mutation of a silly Jewish superstition. It's silly enough when the Jews do it in Hebrew, but to import it into English? That's silly squared ...

With these things in mind, go back to John 14 looking at it in this light:

John 14:
6 יהושע said to him, â€œI am the Way, and THE TRUTH, and the Life. No one comes to the Father except through Me . . . 15 â€œIf you love Me, you shall guard My commands. 16 â€œAnd I shall ask the Father, and He shall give you another Helper, to stay with you forever â€“ 17 THE SPIRIT OF TRUTH, whom the world is unable to receive, because it does not see Him or know Him. But you know Him, for He stays with you and shall be in you.

18 â€œI shall not leave you orphans â€“ I AM COMING TO YOU. . ."
. . .AND SO forth; where ONWARD Yeshua continues saying that both the Father and He shall come to dwell within and around us.

If we drop the theo-babble rap ov ancient gnostiophical Helenistically inclined spin doctors and stick to the scripture as it's own compass and reference point, there is no confusion.

You conveniently left out the most relevant verses:
John 14:16 And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you for ever; 17 Even the Spirit of truth; whom the world cannot receive, because it seeth him not, neither knoweth him: but ye know him; for he dwelleth with you, and shall be in you. 18 I will not leave you comfortless: I will come to you. ... 22 Judas saith unto him, not Iscariot, Lord, how is it that thou wilt manifest thyself unto us, and not unto the world? 23 Jesus answered and said unto him, If a mazn love me, he will keep my words: and my Father will love him, and we will come unto him, and make our abode with him.

Jesus referred to the Holy Spirit with the personal pronoun "he" and said that the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit would dwell in the believer.

And why did you change Scripture? The NT is written in Greek! But at least you got his Hebrew name correct. Most people think it was Yeshua rather than Yehoshua.

Besides, G_d is not the author of confusion.

If that's true, then we have absolute proof that he is not the author of the Bible.

G_d says, "My people shall know my name."

This being the case, if indeed this Spirit of the Holy One, the Rauch Ha'Kodesh is a separate person other than the Father and (of) the Son, what is "His" name?

Bad logic. God has many names in the Bible.

sylvius

09-28-2012, 09:37 AM

But at least you got his Hebrew name correct. Most people think it was Yeshua rather than Yehoshua.

I think his name was Yeshu.

Yeshu haNotsri sounds well, better than Yehoshua haNotsri, although that says nothing.

But gematria 671 is the same as gematria of "yom hashishi", and that tells everything.

sylvius

09-28-2012, 10:05 AM

http://messiahtruth.yuku.com/topic/4127/Yeshua-in-Hebrew?page=1#.UGXXxK7YN8c

1. When a Hebrew word or name is transliterated into Greek letters, the Hebrew letter י yod is replaced by iota (I,ι) and the Hebrew letter ש shin is replaced by sigma (Σ,σ or ς at the end of a word) because the Greek language lacks both of the consonantal sounds y and sh; and, furthermore, menâ€™s names regularly end with -s in Greek (e.g. Ἀρίσταρχος ArÃ*starchos, Ἀρχιμήδης Archimēdes, Μωσῆς Mōsēs, etc etc etc).

2. The Biblical Hebrew name יְהוֹשֻֽׁעַ Y'hoshu'a started to be shortened to יֵשֽׁוּעַ YÃ©shu'a during the Babylonian Exile period, and this was shortened still further to יֵֽשׁוּ YÃ©shu in the post-Biblical period after the Return (christians sometimes claim that this form of the name is really just an insulting acronym that â€œstands forâ€ the Hebrew phrase יִמַּח שְׁמוֹ וְזִכְרוֹ yimmaḥ sh'mo v'zichro â€œmay his name and memory be blotted outâ€, but this simply isnâ€™t true because nobody would ever say, for example, â€œHitler yÃ©shuâ€â€”when that phrase is used, itâ€™s always written out or spoken in full: â€œHitler yimmaḥ sh'mo v'zichroâ€).

3. The combined result of 1. and 2. is that â€œYÃ©shu'aâ€ becomes Ἰησοῦας (Iēsouas) when transliterated from Hebrew into Greek letters, and â€œYÃ©shuâ€ becomes Ἰησοῦς (Iēsous)â€”and then, when these names undergo a second transliteration from Greek into Latin letters, they become respectively â€œJesuasâ€ and â€œJ-susâ€ (because the initial â€œIâ€ was replaced by â€œJâ€ from the Middle Ages onwards).

4. The christian mangod is consistently called Ἰησοῦς Iēsous (apparently a transliteration of the Hebrew name יֵֽשׁוּ YÃ©shu) throughout the new twistament, but this is only part of the story. I have been able to find fourteen Hebrew names in the T'nach that begin with the letters יְהוֹ־ (â€œY'hoâ€“â€) in Hebrew, and the transliterations of these names in the pseudo-septuagint begin with Ιωâ€“ (â€œIoâ€“â€) in all of these 14 cases with one single, solitary exception:

1. יְהוֹאָחָז Y'ho'aḥaz is spelt Ιωαχας (â€œIoakhasâ€),
2. יְהוֹאָשׁ Y'ho'ash is spelt Ιωας (â€œIoasâ€),
3. יְהוֹזָבָד Y'hozavad is spelt Ιωζαβεδ (â€œIozabedâ€),
4. יְהוֹיָכִין Y'hoyachin is spelt Ιωακιμ (â€œIoakimâ€) [although this is actually an error],
5. יְהוֹיָקִים Y'hoyachin is also spelt Ιωακιμ (â€œIoakimâ€),
6. יְהוֹנָדָב Y'honadav is spelt Ιωναδαβ (â€œIoanadabâ€),
7. יְהוֹנָתָן Y'honatan is spelt Ιωναθαν (â€œIoanathanâ€),
8. יְהוֹעַדִּין Y'ho'addin is spelt Ιωαδιν (â€œIoadinâ€),
9. יְהוֹצָדָק Y'hotzadak is spelt Ιωσαδακ (â€œIosadakâ€),
10. יְהוֹרָם Y'horam is spelt Ιωραμ (â€œIoramâ€),
11. יְהוֹשֶֽׁבַע Y'hosheva is spelt Ιωσαβεε (â€œIosabeeâ€),
12. יְהוֹשַׁבְעַת Y'hoshav'at is spelt Ιωσαβεθ (â€œIosabethâ€), and
13. יְהוֹשָׁפָט Y'hoshafat is spelt Ιωσαφατ (â€œIosaphatâ€),

BUT

14. יְהוֹשֻֽׁעַ Y'hoshu'a is spelt Ἰησοῦς (â€œIēsousâ€).

In fact, יְהוֹשֻֽׁעַ Y'hoshu'a is the only Hebrew name starting with the letters יְהוֹ־ (â€œY'hoâ€“â€) whose transliteration in the pseudo-septuagint doesnâ€™t begin with Ιωâ€“ (â€œIoâ€“â€), which is mighty suspicious because this makes it look very much as though the spelling of the Greek transliteration of the name יְהוֹשֻֽׁעַ Y'hoshu'a has been deliberately altered to make it match the way יֵֽשׁוּ YÃ©shu (â€œJ-susâ€) is spelt in the additional Greek texts that christians print as a kind of â€œsupplementâ€ to their bibles and which they pretend are a â€œcontinuationâ€ of the books they stole from us.

sylvius

09-28-2012, 10:49 AM

Here it is , in somewhat other version than I have read it (there is no mentioning of the "this time next year".)

http://onlineookjoods.wordpress.com/2011/04/30/de-munkatcher-rebbe-en-koningin-wilhelmina/

Here a version in English:

http://rabbipauli.blogspot.nl/2010/09/parshiyos-nitzavim-vayalech-rambam-on.html

The following amazing true story shows how we Jews can be "a light unto the nations."
In 1908, Queen Wilhelmina of Holland went for a brief vacation to the popular resort area of Marienbad, Austria, near the German border. Since this was not an official state visit, she only had a small entourage of people with her, and there was no welcoming ceremony on her arrival at the train station in Marienbad.
As the Queen got off the train, she noticed a large crowd on the platform. Obviously, a prominent personality had just arrived. Everyone was gathered around trying to get a glimpse of the famous person.
Queen Wilhelmina asked and was told that a great Jewish personality, the Munkaczer Rebbe, Rabbi Tzvi Hirsch Spira (1845-1914) had just arrived. Many of the Rebbeâ€™s chassidim had come to greet him at the train station.
The Queen then asked what a Rebbe is. She was told that a Rebbe is a very holy man of great wisdom who gives blessings and advice to his many followers. Thousands seek his counsel and ask the Rebbe to pray on their behalf. Often the Rebbeâ€™s prayers are answered and those who seek his blessings live to see their wishes fulfilled.
When the Queen heard that the Rebbe had spiritual power, she immediately thought of her own situation. The Queen and her husband Prince Hendrik were childless. Both she and her husband were concerned that the Dutch monarchy should continue in their family. Without children, the royal line would end with Queen Wilhelmina.
The Queen and her entourage left the train station. Later that day, the Queen asked one of her attendants to try to arrange for her to meet the great Rebbe privately. The next evening, the Munkaczer Rebbe was brought to a secluded area of a beautiful park just outside of the city. Queen Wilhelmina was accompanied by two attendants and the Rebbe came with two bochurim (yeshiva students).
As the Rebbe and the Queen sat down, the Queen sensed that the man sitting opposite her was a personality of great stature. She spoke candidly to the Rebbe about how sad she was about being childless.
The Rebbe listened attentively and told the Queen not to worry. Her monarchy would continue. As the Queen was about to depart, the Rebbe cited a verse from the Torah saying that the Queenâ€™s kingdom will not be severed â€œuntil Shilo comes.â€(Genesis 49:10) Meaning, the Queen will have descendants until the coming of the Moshiach.(the Messiah)
The next year, in 1909, the Queen had a little girl and named her Juliana. It was the only child that the Royal couple ever had. (Thirty-nine years later, in 1948, Juliana became Queen of Holland. Her daughter, Beatrix is presently the Queen of Holland.)
A little more than 30 years after the Munkaczer Rebbe had given Queen Wilhelmina a blessing for a child, a black cloud descended over Europe. World War II had begun. The Germans sought out Jews in every country where they could find them.
Rabbi Yakov Tzvi Katz was one poor Jew who was caught in the German net. During the War, Rabbi Katz was sent to the Bergen-Belsen concentration camp. Rabbi Katzâ€™s 18 year old son Shmuel was deported from the ghetto and never heard from again. 12 volumes of Rabbi Katzâ€™s writings on halacha (Jewish law) were burned.
After the war was over Rabbi Katz returned to his native Hungary, in an attempt to put his life back together. He quickly saw that there was no future for the Jews in post-war Hungary. Many Jews at the time were trying to emigrate to Holland. Rabbi Katz tried, but he was denied entry into Holland twice. Holland was only accepting those Jews who had professions which would benefit the country. There were already plenty of rabbis in Holland.
One day, Rabbi Katz decided to write a letter directly to Queen Wilhelmina. He explained the hardships he and his family had experienced in the war. He then wrote, â€œSurely Your Highness remembers the very momentous meeting that preserved the course of royalty in Holland.â€
He detailed the Queenâ€™s encounter with the Munkaczer Rebbe in Marienbad, almost 40 years previous. Rabbi Katz continued writing in his letter to the Queen that the Rebbe had insisted that two boys come along with him for the meeting with the Queen.
The Rebbe would need an interpreter since the Queen would be speaking German. Rabbi Katz wrote, â€œI was that 18-year-old boy who accompanied the [Rebbe], and it was I who transmitted to the Queen the wonderful news from the saintly Rabbi that [the Queen] would bear a child within a year.â€
The letter which Rabbi Katz had sent to the Queen was written in Yiddish. Although Rabbi Katz could have written the letter in German, he was concerned that one of the Queenâ€™s attendants would intercept the letter, read it, and then prevent it from getting to the Queen. Therefore, when the letter in Yiddish arrived, and old Russian chazan named Rabinowitz was summoned from his synagogue in The Hague and asked to translate the letter. The chazan read the letter. Realizing its significance, the chazan translated the letter with all the emotion he could manage. The translated text was brought to Queen Wilhelmina.
After reading the note, the Queen saw to it that Rabbi Katz be granted immigration papers swiftly. Then he was able to rebuild his life which had been largely destroyed. (from: Echoes of the Maggid, R. Pesach J. Krohn p.95-99)
We see from this amazing story the power of a Jew to make a good impression on the nations. As the verse tells us, â€œIf you observe the commandments of Hashem, your G-d, and you go in His ways. Then all the peoples of the earth will see that the Name of Hashem is proclaimed upon you, and they will honor you.â€ (Deuteronomy 28:9-10) When a Jew acts according to the Torah, he shines with the holiness of Hashem.
The Munkaczer Rebbe and Rabbi Yakov Tzvi Katz showed the nations the beauty of a Torah observant lifestyle. Let us all learn from their examples and then we will truly be a light unto the nations. As the Prophet tells us, â€œ...I will strengthen your hand; I will protect you; I will set you for a covenant to the people, for a light unto the nations...â€ (Yishayahu 42:6) Good Shabbos Everyone.

sylvius

09-28-2012, 11:08 AM

There is another strange thing about Habakkuk besides that Habakkuk 2:2 was chosen as Leitmotiv for the whole project and besides his miracle birth (that resembles the miracle birth of Isaac and also of Juliana)
namely that on Richard's wheel he is attached to the same spoke as Philemon, both being "beloved ones" by their names Embracement and Kissing (p.270 Biblewheel book).

Richard Amiel McGough

09-28-2012, 11:39 AM

I think his name was Yeshu.

Yeshu haNotsri sounds well, better than Yehoshua haNotsri, although that says nothing.

But gematria 671 is the same as gematria of "yom hashishi", and that tells everything.
Ha! You put Jesus on your hobby horse riding into Jerusalem. That's funny! :lmbo:

After decades of careful and exhaustive study, I have concluded that the value of Yeshu = 386 plays no important role in gematria.

Here is the real gematria that proves Yehoshua was his true name. We begin with the value of Yehoshua = 391 (http://biblewheel.com/gr/gr_391.asp) = Yeshua (Salvation).

The Number 391 (http://biblewheel.com/gr/gr_391.asp)

Jesus (Yehoshua)
http://biblewheel.com/images/Yehoshua.gif

Salvation
http://biblewheel.com/images/gr/00391H_Salvation.gif
Yeshuah

What is his Name? [Pro 30:4]
http://biblewheel.com/images/Ma_Shemu.gif
Mah Shemu?

Note that it also is the answer to the question in Proverbs 30:4
Proverbs 30:4 Who hath ascended up into heaven, or descended? who hath gathered the wind in his fists? who hath bound the waters in a garment? who hath established all the ends of the earth? what is his name, and what is his son's name, if thou canst tell?

The question "Who hath ascended up into heaven, or descended?" is explicitly answered in the NT:
Ephesians 4:8 Wherefore he saith,When he [Christ] ascended up on high, he led captivity captive, and gave gifts unto men. 9 (Now that he ascended, what is it but that he [Christ] also descended first into the lower parts of the earth? 10 He that descended is the same also that ascended up far above all heavens, that he might fill all things.)

The whole verse of Proverbs 30:4 tightly connected to Christ in both Greek and Hebrew gematria as well as in its plain meaning:

Question

Value
Answer

Who hath ascended up into heaven, or descended? who hath gathered the wind in his fists? who hath bound the waters in a garment? who hath established all the ends of the earth?

3030 (http://biblewheel.com/gr/gr_3030.asp)
The Son of Man
http://biblewheel.com/images/thesonofman.gif

What is His Name?
http://biblewheel.com/images/ma_shemu.gif

391 (http://biblewheel.com/GR/GR_391.asp)
Yehoshua
http://biblewheel.com/images/Yehoshua.gif

What is His Son's Name?
http://biblewheel.com/images/ma_shem_benu.gif

443 (http://biblewheel.com/GR/GR_443.asp)
The Word
http://biblewheel.com/images/hologos.gif

Note the appearance of the Number 443 = Ho Logos which refers to Christ specifically as the Son of God in answer to the question "What is his son's name?". You can deny these facts all you want, but you can't refute them. Your rejection of reality won't change any of the facts one iota. And this is, of course, just the beginning of an overwhelming mountain of evidence.

Now let's look at the value of his full title Yehoshua HaMeshiach:

The Number 754 (http://biblewheel.com/gr/gr_754.asp)

My Holy Name [Ezek 39.7]
http://biblewheel.com/images/ShemQadshi.gif
Shem Qadshi

JESUS CHRIST
http://biblewheel.com/images/YehoshuaHaMeshiach.gif
Yehoshua HaMeshiach

The Authority [Rev 12.10]
http://biblewheel.com/images/TheAuthority.gif
Hey Exusia

The Mighty One of Israel [Isa 1.24]
http://biblewheel.com/images/MightyOneOfIsrael.gif
Avir Yisrael

the appearance of the likeness
of the glory of the LORD [Ezek 1.28]
http://biblewheel.com/images/Ezek_126_754.gif
Mirah damuth Kavod YHVH

Melchizedek, King of Peace [Gen 14.18]
http://biblewheel.com/images/MelchizedekKingOfPeace.gif

Now mere lists of words and numbers prove little, but they are suggestive of something significant going on here. The more powerful evidence is from verses like Proverbs 30:4 which is structured entirely on titles of Christ and which speaks directly of the God's "son." But the connection of Christ's title with words like "My Holy Name" are very significant. And the identity from Ezekiel suggest that Christ was the "man" he saw sitting on the Throne of God. And the identity with Melchizedek coheres perfectly with the idea that Melchizedek was a pre-incarnational appearance of Christ - a "Christophany." This is powerful evidence. I know you can quote Rabbis who say he was Shem, but they know nothing of Christ so their opinions are formed in the darkness of ignorance and are totally irrelevant. They certainly can't trump identities like these, especially when you put together all the cumulative evidence.

The final proof comes from the primary divine name itself, YHVH, which contains the KEY which I received in the Dumbo Dream (http://www.biblewheel.com/forum/showthread.php?2619-Looking-for-Dumbo) 22 years ago. The rabbis play around with many possible "full spellings." I use the most fundamental:

Yod = 20
He = 6
Vav = 12
He = 6

The full spelling of the Divine Name is

YHVH (Full) = 20 + 6 + 12 + 6 = 44

Christ is the "Vav" in the Tetragrammaton because Vav is the sixth letter and six is the number of Man, and Christ is God in human flesh. Therefore, we find the KEY to it all:

V (Full) x YHVH (Full) = 12 x 44 = 528 = KEY (Maphte'ach, Isaiah 22:22)

Note the Key is found in Isaiah 22:22. The Number 22 refers to the 22 Hebrew letters. Isaiah is the 23rd book, and 23 = Aleph + Tav which corresponds to the Greek title Alpha Omega.

And this returns us to Yehoshua spelled full:

Yehoshuah (Full) = 20 + 6 + 12 + 360 + 130 = 528 = KEY = V (Full) x YHVH (Full)

And multiplying again by the Vav of the Tetragrammaton, we find the full title of the Lord Jesus Christ in Greek which also is the value of a number of OT Hebrew verses relating directly to Christ, most significantly Isaiah 53:11.

The Number 3168 (http://biblewheel.com/gr/gr_3168.asp)

Lord Jesus Christ
http://biblewheel.com/images/gr/03168G_LordJesusChrist.gif
Kurios Ihsous Christos

The Gospel of the Kingdom of God [2 Tim 2.5]
http://biblewheel.com/images/gr/03168G_Mark114.gif
To Evangelion tes Basileias tou Theou

The Mediator between God and men [2 Tim 2.5]
http://biblewheel.com/images/gr/03168G_Mediator.gif
Mesites Theou kai anthropos

He shall see of the travail of his soul, and shall be satisfied:
by his knowledge shall my righteous servant justify many;
for he shall bear their iniquities. [Sum of Isa 53.11]
http://biblewheel.com/images/gr/03168H_Isaiah5311.gif

Who is like unto thee, O LORD, among the gods?
who is like thee, glorious in holiness,
fearful in praises, doing wonders? [Ex 15.11]
http://biblewheel.com/images/gr/03168H_Ex1511.gif

Put everything about together, and you have an overwhelming case for both the proper Hebrew name of Jesus being Yehoshua, and the validity of Greek gematria integrated with Hebrew. And there are a few other implications that I will let the students work out for themselves.

sylvius

09-28-2012, 12:39 PM

Ha! You put Jesus on your hobby horse riding into Jerusalem.
He was the donkey-burden = "chomer" = the hundredfold "omer" ...

After decades of careful and exhaustive study, I have concluded that the value of Yeshu = 386 plays no important role in gematria.
like if any number does play a role in gematria.
Gematria is not a kind of a theater, or movie.

"shuf"= to crush, bruise, trample, strike;to blow, emit poisonous fumes
Genesis 3:15,
הוּא יְשׁוּפְךָ רֹאשׁ וְאַתָּה תְּשׁוּפֶנּוּ עָקֵב
"hu y'shufcha rosh v'atah t'shufÃ¨nu akev"
He will crush your head, and you will bite his (Achilles-)heel.
"Nachash", snake, having same gematria as "mashiach", viz. 358...

Here is the real gematria that proves Yehoshua was his true name.

Why then wasn't Yehoshua bin Nun already Messiah? His name shows up the same gematria.

sylvius

09-28-2012, 12:57 PM

You did put me on a wrong leg,

gematria of Yeshu is 316 and not 386.

Richard Amiel McGough

09-28-2012, 01:05 PM

After decades of careful and exhaustive study, I have concluded that the value of Yeshu = 386 plays no important role in gematria.
like if any number does play a role in gematria.
Gematria is not a kind of a theater, or movie.

I think this explains a lot of the problems you have communicating. English is not your first language and you don't understand common idioms. Anything that features prominently in a study is said to "play an important role" - for example, integers play a central role in number theory, whereas they play a relatively minor role in calculus where real numbers are featured. That phrase has absolutely nothing to do with suggesting that numbers are dancing on the stage of a theater.

Why then wasn't Yehoshua bin Nun already Messiah? His name shows up the same gematria.
Oh, so you are implying that every word with the same value means the same thing? That's not how you do your gematria. Therefore, you reveal that you are deliberately being logically inconsistent, and that means that your heart and mind are corrupt. You really need to clean yourself up dude.

Richard Amiel McGough

09-28-2012, 01:09 PM

You did put me on a wrong leg,

gematria of Yeshu is 316 and not 386.
Yeshu (Yod Shin Vav = 316) is the way that the Rabbis deliberately pervert the name of Jesus to insult him. It is never used in the Bible.

The shortened form of Yehoshua = 391 is Yeshua = 386.

sylvius

09-28-2012, 01:25 PM

I stay with it,

Pilatus had written on the cross:

Ἰησοῦς ὁ Ναζωραῖος ὁ βασιλεὺς τῶν Ἰουδαίων,

in Hebrew it must have been "Yeshu Hanotsri (ha)melech haY'hudim"

since it plays with
. καὶ λέγει τοῖς Ἰουδαίοις, Ἴδε ὁ βασιλεὺς ὑμῶν. ἐκραύγασαν οὖν ἐκεῖνοι, αρον ἆρον, σταύρωσον αὐτόν.
λέγει αὐτοῖς ὁ Πιλᾶτος, Τὸν βασιλέα ὑμῶν σταυρώσω; ἀπεκρίθησαν οἱ ἀρχιερεῖς, Οὐκ ἔχομεν βασιλέα εἰ μὴ Καίσαρα.
He said to the Jews, â€œBehold your King!â€ They cried out, â€œAway with him, away with him, crucify him!â€ Pilate said to them, â€œShall I crucify your King?â€ The chief priests answered, â€œWe have no king but Caesar.â€

Like also Mark 12:15-17 does;
Bring me a denarius[ and let me look at it.â€ And they brought one. And he said to them, â€œWhose image and inscription is this?â€ They said to him, â€œCaesar's.â€ 17 Jesus said to them, â€œRender to Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and to God the things that are God's.â€

image = εἰκών, like the image of the beast with the number 666.

If you leave out the "hey" from "haNotsri" you would read "Yeshu Notsri" with gematria 666. Written with seven letters, like the seven heads of the beast, with ten horns ("tsade" having two horns, and "shin" three horns, the other 5 letters each one horn).

It is something known. I heard from a Jewish cello-player.

It proves that his name was Yeshu,

sylvius

09-28-2012, 01:42 PM

I think this explains a lot of the problems you have communicating. English is not your first language and you don't understand common idioms. Anything that features prominently in a study is said to "play an important role" - for example, integers play a central role in number theory, whereas they play a relatively minor role in calculus where real numbers are featured. That phrase has absolutely nothing to do with suggesting that numbers are dancing on the stage of a theater.

Gematria is measuring, you meausure with a measure -rod, on which all numbers are indicated. 1 meter = 100 centimeters.
There is not one number more important than any other number.

Or do you think there is a certain hierarchy in numbers, f.e. that triangular numbers are superior to non-triangular numbers?
Or is number one also the first, the frontman, the highest, and number two second (lower) and so forth?

Oh, so you are implying that every word with the same value means the same thing? I didn't say so.
It is just that for you the number 391 proves that Jesus's Hebrew name was Yehoshua, . That's not how you do your gematria, dude. Therefore, you reveal that you are deliberately being logically inconsistent, and that means that your heart and mind are corrupt. You really need to clean yourself up .

Richard Amiel McGough

09-28-2012, 02:21 PM

Gematria is measuring, you meausure with a measure -rod, on which all numbers are indicated. 1 meter = 100 centimeters.
There is not one number more important than any other number.

Or do you think there is a certain hierarchy in numbers, f.e. that triangular numbers are superior to non-triangular numbers?
Or is number one also the first, the frontman, the highest, and number two second (lower) and so forth?

There is a natural hierarchy of numbers: 1, 2, 3 ...

There is no hierarchy of forms of numbers, like triangular, square, Fibonacci, etc. But there are ordered patterns that are more significant than random numbers. For example, the self-reflective self-similarity of Genesis 1:1 that subdivides according to the natural grammar of the sentence:

Genesis 1:1 = 2701 = 37 x 73 = T(73) = T(37) + 2T(37-1)

Where the sentence subdivides according to its natural grammar:

In the beginning God created the heavens = 1998 = 2T(36) = 2T(37-1)

and the earth = 703 = T(37)

And of course these patterns can be written in terms of the Holographic Generating Set (http://biblewheel.com/gr/GR_Creation_Set.asp) (27, 37, 73) which shows their natural integration with John 1:1. The relations become very clear if we represent the set with letters:

A = 27
B = 37
C = 73
D = 137 = A + B + C

Note that B, C, and D are primes, and 137 is the first approximation to the Fine Structure Constant (http://biblewheel.com/gr/GR_FineStructure.asp) (which is profoundly integrated with John 1:1). We now have a compact way to express the alphanumeric structure of Genesis 1:1

Genesis 1:1

= BC
Prime composition of 2701.

= T(C)

Triangular Structure

= T(B) + 2AB

Triangular Substructure

= 100A + 1

Relation to A from GenSet

And a compact way to express John 1:1:

John 1:1 = 3627 = 3700 - 73 = 100B - C

Thus we see that Genesis 1:1 and John 1:1 are linked by the three elements of the GenSet:

Genesis 1:1 + AB = 100B = John 1:1 + C

And just as 100B connects those verses, so 100A + 1 is the value of Genesis 1:1

Genesis 1:1 = 2701 = 100A + 1

Both the sum and the difference of Genesis 1:1 and John 1:1 are simple combinations of the the three elements of the GenSet:

John 1:1 + Genesis 1:1 = AB + C2

John 1:1 - Genesis 1:1 = AB - C

And the sum of the two verses is T(112), the triangular form of the number 112 = YHVH Elohim (The Lord God) which is the value of the primary Hebrew title of God:

John 1:1 + Genesis 1:1 = AB + C2 = T(112)

Therefore the sum of the two verses is a larger triangular number that includes the double triangular structure of Genesis 1:1 so the sum of the two verses has a triple triangular substructure. These amazingly elegant patterns are proof that Greek and Hebrew gematria are integrated. Here is a picture of some of these relations (explained in detail here (http://biblewheel.com/gr/GR_Creation_Set.asp)):

http://biblewheel.com/images/GenJohn_Tri_2.gif

This is just a part of a much larger pattern that includes the entire passages of Genesis 1:1-5 and John 1:1-5 which form the Full Creation Holograph (http://biblewheel.com/gr/GR_Creation_Hyper.asp).

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

So what was that you were saying about how we are not "allowed" to compare Greek and Hebrew gematria? :p

Richard Amiel McGough

09-28-2012, 02:45 PM

It is just that for you the number 391 proves that Jesus's Hebrew name was Yehoshua
It is not "just for me." It is for anyone with eyes to see.

Timmy

09-28-2012, 03:47 PM

z
...are we gonna go there?

From what scipture reveals, how could the 'Holy Spirit' be any other than the Father and Son united as one spirit, both yachid and echad.

Good morning my friend,

I agree that Twinity seems more biblical than Trinity, but numerically and euphoniously the Three trumps the Two.

Well Good day! Hope it is all fantabulistic up in yur' neck-ah-da' woults.

Actually, when the understanding floored me: two in one, a few passages in the greek TR were questioned as a result, particularily in I Jn. 5.

Euphoniously? Oh, like the sirens of Graeco/Roman mythos?

and numerically hunh? Can't qualm, or even interject a taste of sarcasm over that dude.

Yeah, these things appear palatable, yet that is not what is without contradiction.

YaHoSHu(V)aH does nothing without the Father, so it is easy to see that perspective of mis-identifying G_dhead as though there is another party involved.

It certainly would take alot of work to rework everything based on this info re: "The Dynamic Duo," when everything is base 3 STS.
(It might just screw up alot of heads, too...but isn't that good? Usually, things need be de-constructed before a solid proper foundation is laid.)

There is no place in scripture stating G_d is 3. It was a Roman Catholic invention. . .developing after the second century. Theophilus, Tertulian, and Origen are primarily responsible for it finding it's way into confusing Xristian theology.

We do see in the N.T. this Spirit of the Holy One referenced in ways such as "The Lord is that spirit" and "the spirit of Christ," and also various inferences of the same.
Scripture implies many things that are not explicitly "stated." Your assertion that the Trinity is a "Roman Catholic invention" indicates a rather woeful ignorance of Christian history. It is true that Constantine played an essential role in establishing the Trinity as the official dogma, but the doctrine itself was invented by devout Christians trying to understand what the Bible says and the tradition they had received from the earlier Christians who worshiped Christ as God. They gave Biblical reasons for their conclusions. So if you want to say they are wrong, you need to deal with the arguments they gave. There was a HUGE debate on this topic amongst devout Christians, you know. Woeful ignorance hunh?

I might have started that argument a little over two years ago.

The history was revealed to Timmy by a Jesuit. . .down in N.O.L.A. . .So, it was double-checked historically. Though most sources agree with what has been stated, the clearest accounting of what has been said can be found in the Catholic Encyclopedia in complete detail.

Yeshua never taught trinity nor did the apostles, so when and where (and perhaps why), if these records are incorrect, do you surmise this notion came into existence?

"Everyone who is transgressing
and not staying in the teaching of Messiah
does not possess Elohim.
The one who stays in the teaching of Messiah
possesses both the Father and the Son."
~II John 9

As to the why, there are two possibilities presently known here:
--to avert one (then forming) false kult from spreading the totality of their heretical untruths
--to integrate the pagan deities into the Greek and Roman Orthodox pantheon, by a different name.

(kinda' like Voudon or Santeria does with the highly esteemed dead (aka: saints).)

And speaking of unbiblical traditions invented by religious traditions - Why do you transmute the "o" to an underscore in G_d? Do you really think you are protecting yourself from accidentally violating the Third Commandment that way? It looks to me like a ridiculous translinguistic mutation of a silly Jewish superstition. It's silly enough when the Jews do it in Hebrew, but to import it into English? That's silly squared ...Yes, exactly, or more perhaps?

With these things in mind, go back to John 14 looking at it in this light:

John 14:
6 Yeshua said to him, â€œI am the Way, and THE TRUTH, and the Life. No one comes to the Father except through Me . . . 15 â€œIf you love Me, you shall guard My commands. 16 â€œAnd I shall ask the Father, and He shall give you another Helper, to stay with you forever â€“ 17 THE SPIRIT OF TRUTH, whom the world is unable to receive, because it does not see Him or know Him. But you know Him, for He stays with you and shall be in you.

18 â€œI shall not leave you orphans â€“ I AM COMING TO YOU. . ."
. . .AND SO forth; where ONWARD Yeshua continues saying that both the Father and He shall come to dwell within and around us.

If we drop the theo-babble rap ov ancient gnostiophical Helenistically inclined spin doctors and stick to the scripture as it's own compass and reference point, there is no confusion.
You conveniently left out the most relevant verses:
John 14:16 And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you for ever; 17 Even the Spirit of truth; whom the world cannot receive, because it seeth him not, neither knoweth him: but ye know him; for he dwelleth with you, and shall be in you. 18 I will not leave you comfortless: I will come to you. ... 22 Judas saith unto him, not Iscariot, Lord, how is it that thou wilt manifest thyself unto us, and not unto the world? 23 Jesus answered and said unto him, If a mazn love me, he will keep my words: and my Father will love him, and we will come unto him, and make our abode with him.
Jesus referred to the Holy Spirit with the personal pronoun "he" and said that the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit would dwell in the believer.

And why did you change Scripture? The NT is written in Greek! But at least you got his Hebrew name correct. Most people think it was Yeshua rather than Yehoshua. Oh, like syvi? Yeah, most do not understand the pictoral meaning behind this name either.
As for "Jesus' " real name, the shortened one extrapolated is like calling Richard: Rich, or Timotheus: Tim.
Both names are used by Timmy and associate bretheren. . .
. . .and was it not you to whom it was explained most Israeli's intentional mis-pronounciation of the shortened one is for the purpose of cursing the name?
(. . .and don't believe syvi's cut and paste as this very thing has been experienced/met with by some most orthodox yids.)

Now those verses were not conveniently left out so much as giving us more to discuss concerning this issue.
(HINT: consider tense and pronouns in the fact that Yehoshua is prophecying.)
He came to earth fully AS/in the form of --(though seed of the woman)-- in the likeness of a human.
Flesh is not spirit and spirit is not flesh. (For one such example of this meaning, see Mt. 4-->immersion of Yehoshuah by John the Dunker.

Indeed, the NT seems to have been re-written in Greek, but as far as we currently know, it was/is (at least gentile portions were most likely) written initially in Greek (or not?). . .but His name is not Greek, and there is preference here, USUALLY at least, in calling others by their given names, unless they request otherwise. (WE have toyed with one another's on and off again though, haven't we?)

Besides, G_d is not the author of confusion.
If that's true, then we have absolute proof that he is not the author of the Bible.. . .or that banal humans are not the author of the Bible. . .or that those who are confused/adverse/contempuous/judging/etc. already, without openly attempting to comprehend, away from all the humanly contrived method, would seek to disprove whatever in it, and can/sometimes-do create greater confusion than congruency. . .or those who are confused are teaching it. . .et. al.

G_d says, "My people shall know my name."

This being the case, if indeed this Spirit of the Holy One, the Rauch Ha'Kodesh is a separate person other than the Father and (of) the Son, what is "His" name?
Bad logic. God has many names in the Bible. One proper name and many variations of that. Some of which you refer to as names are accompanying titles, characterizations etc. . .aren't they?

As for the use of G_d is really a matter of how silly i can be at times and it is not always used. (It's more of a reminder to me, and going to the Chabad site initiated it again again). If it is that irritating, i'll quit or not. . .or how about just using that rendition in every other use of it and not every time. . .or every third one or more. . .or have you another suggestion?

Of the seven eyes in the Lamb in Yahoshuah's Revelation, it says these are the spirits of G_d, so God must be 7, or 9, or possibly ten in person. . .right?

Til' we banter bak and forth next time again again,
Yours Truly,
(the stem and leaves of silliness sometimes,)

Timmy

sylvius

09-28-2012, 11:02 PM

So what was that you were saying about how we are not "allowed" to compare Greek and Hebrew gematria? :p

I can't forbid, you are right.

One thing:
It isn't "One Lord", but "The Lord is one" .

It is not about counting Lords, like counting sheep (which is boring).

sylvius

09-28-2012, 11:12 PM

It is not "just for me." It is for anyone with eyes to see.

In the land of the blind the one eyed man is king

sylvius

09-28-2012, 11:57 PM

I once studied theology at the Catholic University.

One study-mate was a nun, sister Carmelitess, she lived in a very old monastry on top of a hill where I visited her more times. She was the youngest (although by that time already in her thirties) among very aged nuns.
Then she moved to Auschwitz, where there is also a monastry of Carmilitesses. To pray. They also had erected a huge crucifix before the gates of the former concentration/ destruction-camp, with inscribed on it of course the letters INRI, that stand for IESUS NAZARENUS REX IUDAEORUM.
Which is very telling.
Latin knows no definite articles!

That Jesus is rendered in Latin as Iesus (from which derives the English Jesus, Dutch Jezus) is one more proof that his Hebrew name was Yeshu.

The name Yehoshua is rendered in Latin as Iosue (filius Nun).

Richard Amiel McGough

09-29-2012, 08:16 AM

So what was that you were saying about how we are not "allowed" to compare Greek and Hebrew gematria? :p
I can't forbid, you are right.

OK - I'm glad you understand that we are "allowed" to compare Greek and Hebrew gematria.

But what about the profound patterns I have shown? Are you really blind to them? I get the impression my work is over your head. I was trained in mathematics and physics so I recognize patterns and am especially impressed when a large diverse set of data is explained by a small set of elements. This is the essence of science. We explain all the matter in the universe in all its endless manifestations as combinations of a small set of 98 elements (atoms). And then we explain those 98 elements in terms of 3 particles (protons, neutrons, electrons). This is why the Holographic Generating Set is so impressive. It is a set of three numbers that encompasses a broad range of relations between Genesis 1:1-5 and John 1:1-5 in an extremely elegant and amazingly self-reflective way that also integrates with Base 10.

Oh, and I just happened to notice a nice way to write the triangular substructure of Genesis 1:1 this morning. I don't know why it didn't occur to me before. Given that C - B = 36 = B - 1, we can write 2T(B-1) as 2T(C-B):

Genesis 1:1 = 2701 = 100A + 1 = 37 x 73 = BC = T(C) = T(B) + 2T(C-B)

Is that not amazing? How did I come up with the simple set (A=27, B=37, C=73) and D = A + B + C = 137 that is so deeply integrated with the structure of the creation passages? And of course you know that QBLH (Qaballah) = 137 = the sum of the GenSet.

One thing:
It isn't "One Lord", but "The Lord is one" .

It can be either because the Hebrew phrase "YHVH echad" does not have the word "is" in it. So it's just a matter of interpretation. It could mean either depending on context.

Richard Amiel McGough

09-29-2012, 08:33 AM

That Jesus is rendered in Latin as Iesus (from which derives the English Jesus, Dutch Jezus) is one more proof that his Hebrew name was Yeshu.

The name Yehoshua is rendered in Latin as Iosue (filius Nun).
The Latin is irrelevant to discern the Hebrew name of Jesus because the Vulgate is very inconsistent on this point. In Ezra 2:2 they translate Yeshua as Hiesua whereas in Nehemiah 7:7 they write Hiesuae even though the passages are nearly identical:

VUL Nehemiah 7:7 qui venerunt cum Zorobabel Hiesuae Neemias Azarias Raamias Naamni Mardocheus Belsar Mespharath Beggoai Naum Baana numerus virorum populi Israhel
VUL Ezra 2:2 qui venerunt cum Zorobabel Hiesua Neemia Saraia Rahelaia Mardochai Belsan Mesphar Beguai Reum Baana numerus virorum populi Israhel

And there are other variations. And besides, Latin came late.

We get better information from the Greek LXX because it was translated by Jews. They consistently render Yehoshua as Iesus. That is the name of Jesus in the Greek NT. But this doesn't help answer the question because the LXX uses Iesus for both Yeshua and Yehoshua.

For folks like us who see gematria as significant, the correct name is confirmed by many witnesses. There are few if any relevant identities based on the value of Yeshua = 386 compared with the endless amazing web of self-confirming patterns that are centered on the value of Yehoshua = 391. If there is any validity to gematria, this issue is settled with no ambiguity in my estimation.

sylvius

09-29-2012, 10:50 AM

The Latin is irrelevant to discern the Hebrew name of Jesus because the Vulgate is very inconsistent on this point. In Ezra 2:2 they translate Yeshua as Hiesua whereas in Nehemiah 7:7 they write Hiesuae even though the passages are nearly identical it was about the Latin rendering of the name Yehoshua

And besides, Latin came late.

John 19:19-20,
And Pilate wrote a title, and put it on the cross. And the writing was Jesus Of Nazareth The King Of The Jews. This title then read many of the Jews: for the place where Jesus was crucified was nigh to the city: and it was written in Hebrew, and Greek, and Latin.

We get better information from the Greek LXX because it was translated by Jews. They consistently render Yehoshua as Iesus. That is the name of Jesus in the Greek NT. But this doesn't help answer the question because the LXX uses Iesus for both Yeshua and Yehoshua.

http://messiahtruth.yuku.com/topic/4...1#.UGXXxK7YN8c

In fact, יְהוֹשֻֽׁעַ Y'hoshu'a is the only Hebrew name starting with the letters יְהוֹ־ (â€œY'hoâ€“â€) whose transliteration in the pseudo-septuagint doesnâ€™t begin with Ιωâ€“ (â€œIoâ€“â€), which is mighty suspicious because this makes it look very much as though the spelling of the Greek transliteration of the name יְהוֹשֻֽׁעַ Y'hoshu'a has been deliberately altered to make it match the way יֵֽשׁוּ YÃ©shu (â€œJ-susâ€) is spelt in the additional Greek texts that christians print as a kind of â€œsupplementâ€ to their bibles and which they pretend are a â€œcontinuationâ€ of the books they stole from us.

sylvius

09-29-2012, 11:05 AM

sylvius

09-29-2012, 11:37 AM

Oh, and I just happened to notice a nice way to write the triangular substructure of Genesis 1:1 this morning.

And I just happened to see this work today:

http://i138.photobucket.com/albums/q262/suivlys/Dewind.jpg

http://www.chabad.org/library/bible_cdo/aid/16198/showrashi/true

Since speech is only the wind emanating from the mouth, he [the writer of the Scriptures] calls it פִּיחַ, blowing, and he calls it wind, e.g., (Ps. 33:6) â€œAnd with the wind of His mouth all their host.â€

Richard Amiel McGough

09-29-2012, 11:54 AM

Oh, and I just happened to notice a nice way to write the triangular substructure of Genesis 1:1 this morning. I don't know why it didn't occur to me before. Given that C - B = 36 = B - 1, we can write 2T(B-1) as 2T(C-B):

Genesis 1:1 = 2701 = 100A + 1 = 37 x 73 = BC = T(C) = T(B) + 2T(C-B)

Is that not amazing? How did I come up with the simple set (A=27, B=37, C=73) and D = A + B + C = 137 that is so deeply integrated with the structure of the creation passages? And of course you know that QBLH (Qaballah) = 137 = the sum of the GenSet.

Yes that's nice (no Greek gematria involved :) )
What are you talking about? Do you have the attention span of a housefly? The GenSet is totally involved with Greek gematria. I guess I need to show you again ...

The alphanumeric structure of Genesis 1:1 has a self-reflective self-similarity that subdivides according to the natural grammar of the sentence:

Genesis 1:1 = 2701 = 37 x 73 = T(73) = T(37) + 2T(37-1)

Where the sentence subdivides according to its natural grammar:

In the beginning God created the heavens = 1998 = 2T(36) = 2T(37-1)

and the earth = 703 = T(37)

And of course these patterns can be written in terms of the Holographic Generating Set (http://biblewheel.com/gr/GR_Creation_Set.asp) (27, 37, 73) which shows their natural integration with John 1:1. The relations become very clear if we represent the set with letters:

A = 27
B = 37
C = 73
D = 137 = A + B + C

Note that B, C, and D are primes, and 137 is the first approximation to the Fine Structure Constant (http://biblewheel.com/gr/GR_FineStructure.asp) (which is profoundly integrated with John 1:1). We now have a compact way to express the alphanumeric structure of Genesis 1:1

Genesis 1:1

= BC
Prime composition of 2701.

= T(C)

Triangular Structure

= T(B) + 2AB

Triangular Substructure

= 100A + 1

Relation to A from GenSet

And a compact way to express John 1:1:

John 1:1 = 3627 = 3700 - 73 = 100B - C

Thus we see that Genesis 1:1 and John 1:1 are linked by the three elements of the GenSet:

Genesis 1:1 + AB = 100B = John 1:1 + C

And just as 100B connects those verses, so 100A + 1 is the value of Genesis 1:1

Genesis 1:1 = 2701 = 100A + 1

Both the sum and the difference of Genesis 1:1 and John 1:1 are simple combinations of the the three elements of the GenSet:

John 1:1 + Genesis 1:1 = AB + C2

John 1:1 - Genesis 1:1 = AB - C

And the sum of the two verses is T(112), the triangular form of the number 112 = YHVH Elohim (The Lord God) which is the value of the primary Hebrew title of God:

John 1:1 + Genesis 1:1 = AB + C2 = T(112)

Therefore the sum of the two verses is a larger triangular number that includes the double triangular structure of Genesis 1:1 so the sum of the two verses has a triple triangular substructure. These amazingly elegant patterns are proof that Greek and Hebrew gematria are integrated. Here is a picture of some of these relations (explained in detail here (http://biblewheel.com/gr/GR_Creation_Set.asp)):

http://biblewheel.com/images/GenJohn_Tri_2.gif

This is just a part of a much larger pattern that includes the entire passages of Genesis 1:1-5 and John 1:1-5 which form the Full Creation Holograph (http://biblewheel.com/gr/GR_Creation_Hyper.asp).

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

So you really don't think that there is any connection between Greek and Hebrew gematria? :doh:

sylvius

09-29-2012, 01:05 PM

So you really don't think that there is any connection between Greek and Hebrew gematria? :doh:

Both are about numbers.

Ok, you can compare but not equate.

The 1:4 ratio of the two paradise trees is just shown up in Hebrew.

http://www.inner.org/string/string.htm

Four Forces from One

The ratio 1:4 ("one to four" or "one becoming four") is one of the pillars of creation as revealed in the beginning of the Torah. We will here observe four phenomena from Genesis based upon the ratio 1:4.

The two letters alef (= 1) and dalet (= 4) form together the word for "vapor." In the beginning of creation, the "vapor" rose from the earth to moisten the earth for the sake of the creation of man.

One river flows from Eden to the garden, which thereafter, leaving the garden, divides into the four great rivers of the earth.

"The Tree of Life" (etz ha'chaim) = 233. "The Tree of Knowledge of good and evil" (etz hada'at tov v'rah) = 932. 932 = 4 times 233. Thus the ratio of the two trees is "one to four" (the "one" being the Tree of Life and the resulting "four" being the Tree of Knowledge of good and evil).

The word "good" (tov, the positive force of the Tree of Knowledge of good and evil) = 17. The word "life" (chaim, of the Tree of Life) = 68. 17:68 = 1:4. The word for "life" possesses four letters. The average value of each of its letters is "good." Thus we see that the fundamental force of "life" (of the Tree of Life) is in fact the positive force of "good" (inherent in the Tree of Knowledge of good and evil). The two trees thus create an infinite cycle of Divine energy.

To conclude, the most obvious phenomenon in the Torah related to the four forces of nature deriving from one, is that God's essential Name Havayah is composed of four letters. "God is One." In the future it will become revealed that "God is One and His Name is One." "His Name" refers to the four letters of Havayah. This is the ultimate revelation of the Divine "unified field theory."

Richard Amiel McGough

09-29-2012, 01:39 PM

The 1:4 ratio of the two paradise trees is just shown up in Hebrew.

http://www.inner.org/string/string.htm
Yeah, I've known about the 1:4 ratio between the two trees for a couple decades. I always related it to the fact that the Number 4 is associated with Death, and the Tree of Knowledge brought Death as opposed to life.

But the Number 4 is also related to Birth of course. Birth and Death are the two Universal Doors (Dalet = 4) (http://www.biblewheel.com/InnerWheels/Genesis/Genesis04.asp) everyone passes through as they enter and exit this life. That's why I thought it was pretty significant that the first death and the first birth (yeled = 44) and the first mention of blood (DM = 44) all appear in Genesis 4. And of course, the word Dalet is spelled backwards in the first verse of Genesis 4 where it means "gave birth."

Richard Amiel McGough

09-29-2012, 01:55 PM

it was about the Latin rendering of the name Yehoshua

John 19:19-20,
And Pilate wrote a title, and put it on the cross. And the writing was Jesus Of Nazareth The King Of The Jews. This title then read many of the Jews: for the place where Jesus was crucified was nigh to the city: and it was written in Hebrew, and Greek, and Latin.

Yes, but that tells us nothing about the Hebrew name of Jesus.

http://messiahtruth.yuku.com/topic/4...1#.UGXXxK7YN8c
The link didn't copy correctly.

sylvius

09-29-2012, 11:23 PM

Yeah, I've known about the 1:4 ratio between the two trees for a couple decades.

And you didn't see the miracle?

I always related it to the fact that the Number 4 is associated with Death, and the Tree of Knowledge brought Death as opposed to life.

There are some who see the tree of life as the cross, and the body of Jesus as the fruit of the tree of life.

What do you think of that?

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/f5/Baum_des_Todes_und_des_Lebens.jpg

But the Number 4 is also related to Birth of course. Birth and Death are the two Universal Doors (Dalet = 4) (http://www.biblewheel.com/InnerWheels/Genesis/Genesis04.asp) everyone passes through as they enter and exit this life. That's why I thought it was pretty significant that the first death and the first birth (yeled = 44) and the first mention of blood (DM = 44) all appear in Genesis 4. And of course, the word Dalet is spelled backwards in the first verse of Genesis 4 where it means "gave birth."

As you know the number 434 plays a big role in my fantasies.

Genesis 1 being written with 434 words, "hashsishi" being the 434th.

sylvius

09-29-2012, 11:49 PM

Yes, but that tells us nothing about the Hebrew name of Jesus.

Yes but that it is likely not Yehoshua nor Yeshua.

The link didn't copy correctly.

I posted it already before in this same thread, #69

http://messiahtruth.yuku.com/topic/4127/Yeshua-in-Hebrew?page=1#.UGfnQK7YN8d

(I copied the abbreviated link )

1. When a Hebrew word or name is transliterated into Greek letters, the Hebrew letter י yod is replaced by iota (I,ι) and the Hebrew letter ש shin is replaced by sigma (Σ,σ or ς at the end of a word) because the Greek language lacks both of the consonantal sounds y and sh; and, furthermore, menâ€™s names regularly end with -s in Greek (e.g. Ἀρίσταρχος ArÃ*starchos, Ἀρχιμήδης Archimēdes, Μωσῆς Mōsēs, etc etc etc).

2. The Biblical Hebrew name יְהוֹשֻֽׁעַ Y'hoshu'a started to be shortened to יֵשֽׁוּעַ YÃ©shu'a during the Babylonian Exile period, and this was shortened still further to יֵֽשׁוּ YÃ©shu in the post-Biblical period after the Return (christians sometimes claim that this form of the name is really just an insulting acronym that â€œstands forâ€ the Hebrew phrase יִמַּח שְׁמוֹ וְזִכְרוֹ yimmaḥ sh'mo v'zichro â€œmay his name and memory be blotted outâ€, but this simply isnâ€™t true because nobody would ever say, for example, â€œHitler yÃ©shuâ€â€”when that phrase is used, itâ€™s always written out or spoken in full: â€œHitler yimmaḥ sh'mo v'zichroâ€).

3. The combined result of 1. and 2. is that â€œYÃ©shu'aâ€ becomes Ἰησοῦας (Iēsouas) when transliterated from Hebrew into Greek letters, and â€œYÃ©shuâ€ becomes Ἰησοῦς (Iēsous)â€”and then, when these names undergo a second transliteration from Greek into Latin letters, they become respectively â€œJesuasâ€ and â€œJ-susâ€ (because the initial â€œIâ€ was replaced by â€œJâ€ from the Middle Ages onwards).

4. The christian mangod is consistently called Ἰησοῦς Iēsous (apparently a transliteration of the Hebrew name יֵֽשׁוּ YÃ©shu) throughout the new twistament, but this is only part of the story. I have been able to find fourteen Hebrew names in the T'nach that begin with the letters יְהוֹ־ (â€œY'hoâ€“â€) in Hebrew, and the transliterations of these names in the pseudo-septuagint begin with Ιωâ€“ (â€œIoâ€“â€) in all of these 14 cases with one single, solitary exception:

1. יְהוֹאָחָז Y'ho'aḥaz is spelt Ιωαχας (â€œIoakhasâ€),
2. יְהוֹאָשׁ Y'ho'ash is spelt Ιωας (â€œIoasâ€),
3. יְהוֹזָבָד Y'hozavad is spelt Ιωζαβεδ (â€œIozabedâ€),
4. יְהוֹיָכִין Y'hoyachin is spelt Ιωακιμ (â€œIoakimâ€) [although this is actually an error],
5. יְהוֹיָקִים Y'hoyachin is also spelt Ιωακιμ (â€œIoakimâ€),
6. יְהוֹנָדָב Y'honadav is spelt Ιωναδαβ (â€œIoanadabâ€),
7. יְהוֹנָתָן Y'honatan is spelt Ιωναθαν (â€œIoanathanâ€),
8. יְהוֹעַדִּין Y'ho'addin is spelt Ιωαδιν (â€œIoadinâ€),
9. יְהוֹצָדָק Y'hotzadak is spelt Ιωσαδακ (â€œIosadakâ€),
10. יְהוֹרָם Y'horam is spelt Ιωραμ (â€œIoramâ€),
11. יְהוֹשֶֽׁבַע Y'hosheva is spelt Ιωσαβεε (â€œIosabeeâ€),
12. יְהוֹשַׁבְעַת Y'hoshav'at is spelt Ιωσαβεθ (â€œIosabethâ€), and
13. יְהוֹשָׁפָט Y'hoshafat is spelt Ιωσαφατ (â€œIosaphatâ€),

BUT

14. יְהוֹשֻֽׁעַ Y'hoshu'a is spelt Ἰησοῦς (â€œIēsousâ€).

In fact, יְהוֹשֻֽׁעַ Y'hoshu'a is the only Hebrew name starting with the letters יְהוֹ־ (â€œY'hoâ€“â€) whose transliteration in the pseudo-septuagint doesnâ€™t begin with Ιωâ€“ (â€œIoâ€“â€), which is mighty suspicious because this makes it look very much as though the spelling of the Greek transliteration of the name יְהוֹשֻֽׁעַ Y'hoshu'a has been deliberately altered to make it match the way יֵֽשׁוּ YÃ©shu (â€œJ-susâ€) is spelt in the additional Greek texts that christians print as a kind of â€œsupplementâ€ to their bibles and which they pretend are a â€œcontinuationâ€ of the books they stole from us.

Which is very convincing!

And more

"Yeshu haNotsri" has gematria 671.

We know John plays with the numbers 153 and 666 ...

We?

sylvius

09-30-2012, 01:47 AM

Strange thing about the number 233 (gematria of "ets hachayim", 1/4 of 932, the gematria of "ets hadaat tov vara") is not only that it is a fibonacci-number and prime number, but also that 233 = (4 x 58) +1.

Genesis 2:9,
וַיַּצְמַח יְ־הֹוָ־ה אֱ־לֹהִים מִן הָאֲדָמָה כָּל עֵץ נֶחְמָד לְמַרְאֶה וְטוֹב לְמַאֲכָל וְעֵץ הַחַיִּים בְּתוֹךְ הַגָּן וְעֵץ הַדַּעַת טוֹב וָרָע
And the Lord God caused to sprout from the ground every tree pleasant to see and good to eat, and the Tree of Life in the midst of the garden, and the Tree of Knowledge of good and evil.

בְּתוֹךְ הַגָּן, "b'toch hagan" = in the midst of the garden.
gematria of "hagan" being 58

That you might think "1" is the middle and "4" the periphery , or even that the garden formed a square.

58 we know also as the number of "chen", favor, grace.

Richard Amiel McGough

09-30-2012, 11:36 AM

And you didn't see the miracle?

What are you talking about? I thought it was amazing. Especially in the way that I explained. Don't you think it is a miracle how it fits with the meaning of Dalet as Door and how this relates to the two Universal Doors (Birth and Death) (http://biblewheel.com/InnerWheels/Genesis/Genesis04.asp) which are introduced in Genesis 4 which opens with the word Dalet spelled backwards?

Genesis 4:1 And Adam knew Eve his wife; and she conceived, and bare (teled) Cain, and said, I have gotten a man from the LORD.
א וְהָאָדָם, יָדַע אֶת-חַוָּה אִשְׁתּוֹ; וַתַּהַר, וַתֵּלֶד אֶת-קַיִן, וַתֹּאמֶר, קָנִיתִי אִישׁ אֶת-יְהוָה.

teled (bore) = 434 = delet (in value and backwards)

There are some who see the tree of life as the cross, and the body of Jesus as the fruit of the tree of life.

What do you think of that?

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/f5/Baum_des_Todes_und_des_Lebens.jpg

From a Christian perspective, it makes perfect sense.

As you know the number 434 plays a big role in my fantasies.

Genesis 1 being written with 434 words, "hashsishi" being the 434th.
Yeah, but you said that no number was more important than any other yet you contradict yourself because you constantly talk about the same number. :p

Richard Amiel McGough

09-30-2012, 11:41 AM

I posted it already before in this same thread, #69

http://messiahtruth.yuku.com/topic/4127/Yeshua-in-Hebrew?page=1#.UGfnQK7YN8d

(I copied the abbreviated link )

Which is very convincing!

That pretty much says it all. You think things based on empty assertion, hearsay, and fantasy are "convincing" even as you totally reject the things I think are convincing, namely, logic and facts. Oh well ... takes all kinds to make the world go round I guess.

sylvius

09-30-2012, 12:43 PM

What are you talking about?

I meant the fact that the numerical values of "ets hachayim" and "ets hadaat tov vara" show up a 1:4 ratio.

From a Christian perspective, it makes perfect sense. Crucifix in the midst of paradise?

There is someone who wrote a book;
http://www.ebay.de/itm/BUCH-Baum-Lebens-Klaus-W-Halbig-Kreuz-Thora-mystischer-Deu-/140857410179?pt=Sach_Fachb%C3%BCcher&hash=item20cbc18283
http://www.benkian-service.de/Bilder/small/978/342/903/3958.JPG
He walks with Bonaventura:
http://www.buchz-inforius.de/pictures/small/978/383/067/5464.JPG

I think it bare nonsense.

Yeah, but you said that no number was more important than any other in gematria.

sylvius

09-30-2012, 12:47 PM

That pretty much says it all. You think things based on empty assertion, hearsay, and fantasy are "convincing" even as you totally reject the things I think are convincing, namely, logic and facts. Oh well ... takes all kinds to make the world go round I guess.

Didn't Prof. Ben Tziyyon build on logic and facts?

What he presented is very convincing.

But besides that I presented already other arguments for the fact that his name must have been Yeshu.

Your logic and facts didn't convince me at all.

sylvius

09-30-2012, 01:36 PM

I think it bare nonsense.

Yet there is the story of the man with the withered hand
(Mark 3:1-6)

Jesus tells him:
Ἔκτεινον τὴν χεῖρα" - stretch out the hand

which might refer to LXX Genesis 3:22,
καὶ εἶπεν ὁ θεός ἰδοὺ Aδαμ γέγονεν ὡς εἷς ἐξ ἡμῶν τοῦ γινώσκειν καλὸν καὶ πονηρόν καὶ νῦν μήποτε ἐκτείνῃ τὴν χεῖρα καὶ λάβῃ τοῦ ξύλου τῆς ζωῆς καὶ φάγῃ καὶ ζήσεται εἰς τὸν αἰῶνα
And the God said, behold Adam has bcome like one of us to know good and evil and now lest he stretch out the hand and take from the tree of life and eat and live forever

In the account of Mark from this event on the Pharisees and Herodians complotted to have Jesus killed.

So you might say that in fact Jesus gave his life for the sake of the man with the withered hand.

Or you might think Jesus had the man with the withered hand take bread (= his body) from the tree of life (= the cross).

Richard Amiel McGough

09-30-2012, 03:53 PM

Didn't Prof. Ben Tziyyon build on logic and facts?

No. As far as I can tell, he doesn't even exist! Someone is just pretending to be "Prof. Ben Tziyyon." I could find no evidence of the existence of a professor by that name anywhere on the internet. Here is what JP Holding said (http://www.tektonics.org/qt/tzzzt.html) when he refuted his gibberish:
There is no sign that "Prof. Mordochai ben-Tziyyon, Universitah Ha'ivrit, Y'rushalayim" actually exists as a person. His name appears nowhere else online (like, say, over a peer-reviewed bibliographic credit). His work titled "The Christianity Cult and Its Deceptions" appears also not in a peer-reviewed journal, but on one of those free "tripod" pages (peculiar for a university professor).

Looks like you've been duped again sylvius.

And your imaginary friend says really, really stupid stuff. For example, he said:
2. The Biblical Hebrew name יְהוֹשֻֽׁעַ Y'hoshu'a started to be shortened to יֵשֽׁוּעַ YÃ©shu'a during the Babylonian Exile period, and this was shortened still further to יֵֽשׁוּ YÃ©shu in the post-Biblical period after the Return (christians sometimes claim that this form of the name is really just an insulting acronym that â€œstands forâ€ the Hebrew phrase יִמַּח שְׁמוֹ וְזִכְרוֹ yimmaḥ sh'mo v'zichro â€œmay his name and memory be blotted outâ€, but this simply isnâ€™t true because nobody would ever say, for example, â€œHitler yÃ©shuâ€â€”when that phrase is used, itâ€™s always written out or spoken in full: â€œHitler yimmaḥ sh'mo v'zichroâ€).

His argument is mere assertion that contradicts a lot of evidence that he didn't deal with at all. Nobody would be expected to say "Hitler yeshu." That doesn't make any sense at all and has nothing to do with what he was supposed to be talking about. It indicates your professor doesn't understand what he's talking about. It is common knowledge that Jews think letters are removed from names in the Bible as a sign of divine displeasure and judgment. To make up an insulting acronym that mangles Christ's name is exactly the type of thing we would expect Jews to do. Who is he trying to fool? Himself? What a nutcase!

And look at what else your "professor" wrote. He refers to the New Testament as the new twistament. He's obviously not a serious thinker trying to make a serious case.

And it gets worse. In his conclusion he states:
14. יְהוֹשֻֽׁעַ Y'hoshu'a is spelt Ἰησοῦς (â€œIēsousâ€).

In fact, יְהוֹשֻֽׁעַ Y'hoshu'a is the only Hebrew name starting with the letters יְהוֹ־ (â€œY'hoâ€“â€) whose transliteration in the pseudo-septuagint doesnâ€™t begin with Ιωâ€“ (â€œIoâ€“â€), which is mighty suspicious because this makes it look very much as though the spelling of the Greek transliteration of the name יְהוֹשֻֽׁעַ Y'hoshu'a has been deliberately altered to make it match the way יֵֽשׁוּ YÃ©shu (â€œJ-susâ€) is spelt in the additional Greek texts that christians print as a kind of â€œsupplementâ€ to their bibles and which they pretend are a â€œcontinuationâ€ of the books they stole from us.

He refers to the Septuagint as the "pseudo-septuagint" which seems to indicate that he holds fringe opinions about that book. His assertion is a confused mess based on nothing but fringe ideas and fantasies. It appears he is saying that the entire Septuagint is a Christian forgery and that's why the name Yehoshua was "deliberately altered" by Christians in the OLD Testament to match the name "Yeshu" of Jesus in the New. Simply stated, he's a major wack-job. And you find him "convincing"? Why am I not surprised? He doesn't have a brain. Of course, that's to be expected I guess since he doesn't even exist! :lol:

sylvius

09-30-2012, 10:06 PM

No. As far as I can tell, he doesn't even exist! Someone is just pretending to be "Prof. Ben Tziyyon." I could find no evidence of the existence of a professor by that name anywhere on the internet. Here is what JP Holding said (http://www.tektonics.org/qt/tzzzt.html) when he refuted his gibberish:
There is no sign that "Prof. Mordochai ben-Tziyyon, Universitah Ha'ivrit, Y'rushalayim" actually exists as a person. His name appears nowhere else online (like, say, over a peer-reviewed bibliographic credit). His work titled "The Christianity Cult and Its Deceptions" appears also not in a peer-reviewed journal, but on one of those free "tripod" pages (peculiar for a university professor).

Looks like you've been duped again sylvius.

And your imaginary friend says really, really stupid stuff. For example, he said:
2. The Biblical Hebrew name יְהוֹשֻֽׁעַ Y'hoshu'a started to be shortened to יֵשֽׁוּעַ YÃ©shu'a during the Babylonian Exile period, and this was shortened still further to יֵֽשׁוּ YÃ©shu in the post-Biblical period after the Return (christians sometimes claim that this form of the name is really just an insulting acronym that â€œstands forâ€ the Hebrew phrase יִמַּח שְׁמוֹ וְזִכְרוֹ yimmaḥ sh'mo v'zichro â€œmay his name and memory be blotted outâ€, but this simply isnâ€™t true because nobody would ever say, for example, â€œHitler yÃ©shuâ€â€”when that phrase is used, itâ€™s always written out or spoken in full: â€œHitler yimmaḥ sh'mo v'zichroâ€).

His argument is mere assertion that contradicts a lot of evidence that he didn't deal with at all. Nobody would be expected to say "Hitler yeshu." That doesn't make any sense at all and has nothing to do with what he was supposed to be talking about. It indicates your professor doesn't understand what he's talking about. It is common knowledge that Jews think letters are removed from names in the Bible as a sign of divine displeasure and judgment. To make up an insulting acronym that mangles Christ's name is exactly the type of thing we would expect Jews to do. Who is he trying to fool? Himself? What a nutcase!

And look at what else your "professor" wrote. He refers to the New Testament as the new twistament. He's obviously not a serious thinker trying to make a serious case.

And it gets worse. In his conclusion he states:
14. יְהוֹשֻֽׁעַ Y'hoshu'a is spelt Ἰησοῦς (â€œIēsousâ€).

In fact, יְהוֹשֻֽׁעַ Y'hoshu'a is the only Hebrew name starting with the letters יְהוֹ־ (â€œY'hoâ€“â€) whose transliteration in the pseudo-septuagint doesnâ€™t begin with Ιωâ€“ (â€œIoâ€“â€), which is mighty suspicious because this makes it look very much as though the spelling of the Greek transliteration of the name יְהוֹשֻֽׁעַ Y'hoshu'a has been deliberately altered to make it match the way יֵֽשׁוּ YÃ©shu (â€œJ-susâ€) is spelt in the additional Greek texts that christians print as a kind of â€œsupplementâ€ to their bibles and which they pretend are a â€œcontinuationâ€ of the books they stole from us.

He refers to the Septuagint as the "pseudo-septuagint" which seems to indicate that he holds fringe opinions about that book. His assertion is a confused mess based on nothing but fringe ideas and fantasies. It appears he is saying that the entire Septuagint is a Christian forgery and that's why the name Yehoshua was "deliberately altered" by Christians in the OLD Testament to match the name "Yeshu" of Jesus in the New. Simply stated, he's a major wack-job. And you find him "convincing"? Why am I not surprised? He doesn't have a brain. Of course, that's to be expected I guess since he doesn't even exist! :lol:

Whether a prof Ben Tziyyon exists or is not the point, or that he is fiercely anti-Christian.

In fact, יְהוֹשֻֽׁעַ Y'hoshu'a is the only Hebrew name starting with the letters יְהוֹ־ (â€œY'hoâ€“â€) whose transliteration in the pseudo-septuagint doesnâ€™t begin with Ιωâ€“ (â€œIoâ€“â€) --

That's a convincing observation.

Richard Amiel McGough

09-30-2012, 10:26 PM

Whether a prof Ben Tziyyon exists or is not the point, or that he is fiercely anti-Christian.

In fact, יְהוֹשֻֽׁעַ Y'hoshu'a is the only Hebrew name starting with the letters יְהוֹ־ (â€œY'hoâ€“â€) whose transliteration in the pseudo-septuagint doesnâ€™t begin with Ιωâ€“ (â€œIoâ€“â€) --

That's a convincing observation.
Convincing of what? And why?

sylvius

09-30-2012, 11:17 PM

Convincing of what? And why?
What?
That it has been deliberately altered from Ιωσυεε to Ἰησοῦς,
the more since Vulgata has Iosue for Yehoshua and not Iesus.

Why? Maybe because of the Jewish mockery with his name as acronym.

sylvius

09-30-2012, 11:52 PM

Yet there is the story of the man with the withered hand
(Mark 3:1-6)

Jesus tells him:
Ἔκτεινον τὴν χεῖρα" - stretch out the hand

which might refer to LXX Genesis 3:22,
καὶ εἶπεν ὁ θεός ἰδοὺ Aδαμ γέγονεν ὡς εἷς ἐξ ἡμῶν τοῦ γινώσκειν καλὸν καὶ πονηρόν καὶ νῦν μήποτε ἐκτείνῃ τὴν χεῖρα καὶ λάβῃ τοῦ ξύλου τῆς ζωῆς καὶ φάγῃ καὶ ζήσεται εἰς τὸν αἰῶνα
And the God said, behold Adam has bcome like one of us to know good and evil and now lest he stretch out the hand and take from the tree of life and eat and live forever

In the account of Mark from this event on the Pharisees and Herodians complotted to have Jesus killed.

So you might say that in fact Jesus gave his life for the sake of the man with the withered hand.

Or you might think Jesus had the man with the withered hand take bread (= his body) from the tree of life (= the cross).

"Hand" returns in Genesis 5:29,
And he called his name Noach, saying: 'This one shall comfort us in our work and in the toil of our hands, which cometh from the ground which the LORD hath cursed.'

זֶה יְנַחֲמֵנוּ, "zeh y'nachameinu", has been understood in a double way, as derived from "nacham", and also from "yanach",

Rashi:

Heb. יְנַחִמֵנוּ He will give us rest (יָנַח מִמֶנוּ) from the toil of our hands. Before Noah came, they did not have plowshares, and he prepared [these tools] for them. And the land was producing thorns and thistles when they sowed wheat, because of the curse of the first man (Adam), but in Noahâ€™s time, it [the curse] subsided. This is the meaning of יְנַחִמֵנוּ. If you do not explain it that way, however (but from the root (נחם), the sense of the word does not fit the name, [נֹחַ], and you would have to name him Menachem. â€” [See Gen. Rabbah 25:2] [i.e., If we explain the word according to its apparent meaning, â€œthis one will console us,â€ the child should have been called Menachem, the consoler.]

John's Paraclete very well might refer to Noach.

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

Paraclete comes from the Koine Greek word παράκλητος (parÃ¡klētos, that can signify "one who consoles or comforts, one who encourages or uplifts; hence refreshes, and/or one who intercedes on our behalf as an advocate in court").

So you might say, the Paraclete has us eat bread again, where we had to feed ourselves with thistles and thorns, since our hands were withered.

Hand, Hebrew "yad", the name of the 10th letter, etc.

Hand showing up the 1-4, thumb and four fingers.

sylvius

10-01-2012, 12:56 AM

Of what?
That it has been deliberately altered from Ιωσυεε to Ἰησοῦς,
the more since Vulgata has Iosue for Yehoshua and not Iesus.

Why? Maybe because of the Jewish mockery with his name as acronym.

LXX has for the Hosea that figures in the Torah Aυση, while for the prophet Hosea it has Ωσηε , while in Hebrew both names are exactly the same, הוֹשֵׁעַ,

sylvius

10-01-2012, 11:50 AM

So you really don't think that there is any connection between Greek and Hebrew gematria? :doh:

You also cannot equate "I am the Alpha and the Omega" with "I am the Aleph and the Tav", like you do in your Biblewheelbook, and with which you make the circle round.

Greek Alphabet has 24 letters, which would make a wheel with 24 spokes, and 72 books needed to make the circle round.

So your wheel explodes exactly in the spot where Aleph and Tav touch.

Omega = big O

"O" being the wind that blows through "Alef":

http://i138.photobucket.com/albums/q262/suivlys/Dewind.jpg

Richard Amiel McGough

10-01-2012, 12:08 PM

You also cannot equate "I am the Alpha and the Omega" with "I am the Aleph and the Tav", like you do in your Biblewheelbook, and with which you make the circle round.

Greek Alphabet has 24 letters, which would make a wheel with 24 spokes, and 72 books needed to make the circle round.

So your wheel explodes exactly in the spot where Aleph and Tav touch.

I do not "equate" Aleph Tav with Alpha Omega. I said they carry the same symbolic meaning in as much as they are the first and last letters of their respective alphabets.

You comments are filled with gross confusion.

sylvius

10-01-2012, 01:05 PM

I do not "equate" Aleph Tav with Alpha Omega. I said they carry the same symbolic meaning in as much as they are the first and last letters of their respective alphabets.

You comments are filled with gross confusion.

You even equate את with ΑΩ

http://www.biblewheel.com/book/Chapters/Chapt05.asp

This word is deeply associated with God's covenants and His miraculous saving acts. The blood of the Passover Lamb was the sign that protected the Israel from death (Exo 12:13), God gave Moses miraculous proofs that He had sent him (Exo 4:5), and He freed them from Egypt with "great signs and wonders" (Deut 6:22). And of utmost significance, this is the word that God chose when He gave the prophecy in Isaiah 7:14 of the miraculous birth of His Son who bears the Sign of Eternity (ΑΩ/את) in Isaiah 7:14:,

Like if ΑΩ should mean "sign / signature/mark/ token / miracle / proof"

This Seal of God's Word â€“ (ΑΩ/את) â€“ is itself a Divine Title not dissimilar to His eternal memorial name I AM THAT I AM (Exo 3:14). But it is more than just a title, and the Letters Aleph and Tav are more than mere symbols â€“ they combine to form a number of Hebrew words that reveal the true nature and origin of the Bible Wheel, chief amongst them being את (ot) which carries the meanings listed in the table. This word appears nearly a hundred times in the Old Testament, first in the fourfold description of the purpose of the heavenly lights made on the Fourth Day (Spoke 4, BW book pg 169):

And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs (ot), and for seasons, and for days, and years:
Genesis 1:14

"ot" is written with "vav" --אוֹת, so there goes your comparison!
Genesis 1:14 it is exceptionally written defective וְהָיוּ לְאֹתֹת
"v'hayu l'otot"- they shall be for signs,
It is said because it is anti-astrology

sylvius

10-01-2012, 01:58 PM

By the way " I AM THAT I AM" is not a Divine Title, nor "a memorial name", but a statement.

Nor is "The Alpha and the Omega" or ΑΩ/את

which is also not "the seal of God's word"

And it is never said that Jesus is Almighty God.

Richard Amiel McGough

10-01-2012, 02:06 PM

You even equate את with ΑΩ

http://www.biblewheel.com/book/Chapters/Chapt05.asp

This word is deeply associated with God's covenants and His miraculous saving acts. The blood of the Passover Lamb was the sign that protected the Israel from death (Exo 12:13), God gave Moses miraculous proofs that He had sent him (Exo 4:5), and He freed them from Egypt with "great signs and wonders" (Deut 6:22). And of utmost significance, this is the word that God chose when He gave the prophecy in Isaiah 7:14 of the miraculous birth of His Son who bears the Sign of Eternity (ΑΩ/את) in Isaiah 7:14:

Like if ΑΩ should mean "sign / signature/mark/ token / miracle / proof"

It's great that you are actually quoting what I write. It helps show the error in your comments. The meaning of Aleph Tav as "ot" meaning "sign" is a fact of the Hebrew language. Alpha/Omega is not a Greek word and so does not have a meaning in that language. But the symbolic meaning carries over and is perfectly understood as being the same as Aleph/Tav. This is obvious because it is found in the Greek NT writings of the Jews who were steeped in the symbolic meaning of the Hebrew OT. Your argument fails.

"ot" is written with "vav" --אוֹת, so there goes your comparison!
Genesis 1:14 it is exceptionally written defective וְהָיוּ לְאֹתֹת
"v'hayu l'otot"- they shall be for signs,
It is said because it is anti-astrology
"ot" can be written with or without the vav. The vav functions as a vowel. It changes nothing. You appear willing to do anything and everything possible to avoid admitting basic truths that are obvious to all rational and informed people.

Richard Amiel McGough

10-01-2012, 02:08 PM

By the way " I AM THAT I AM" is not a Divine Title, nor "a memorial name", but a statement.

Meaningless word games. You make up whatever you need to hide from the truth. This indicates you are totally lost. Truth is hard enough to find. It is impossible to find if you use perverse double standards.

Nor is "The Alpha and the Omega" or ΑΩ/את

which is also not "the seal of God's word"

And it is never said that Jesus is Almighty God.

You can say "is not" like a school yard child all day. It means nothing.

sylvius

10-01-2012, 10:56 PM

It's great that you are actually quoting what I write. It helps show the error in your comments. The meaning of Aleph Tav as "ot" meaning "sign" is a fact of the Hebrew language. Alpha/Omega is not a Greek word and so does not have a meaning in that language. But the symbolic meaning carries over and is perfectly understood as being the same as Aleph/Tav. This is obvious because it is found in the Greek NT writings of the Jews who were steeped in the symbolic meaning of the Hebrew OT. Your argument fails. Greek NT writings of the Jews?

"ot" can be written with or without the vav. The vav functions as a vowel. It changes nothing. You appear willing to do anything and everything possible to avoid admitting basic truths that are obvious to all rational and informed people.

I checked it, you are right that the defective spelling occurs more than once.

הָאוֹת, "haot" = the sign

Said to be the 23rd (missing) letter.

http://www.hadafah.com/haot.htm

My assertion is that Omega in the saying : "I am the Alpha and the Omega" stands for the 23rd letter, i.e. that Omega is the sign.

And more, that the 153 large fish of John 21:1 constitute "the sign".

(me being the proud and obstinate inventor of the NT numbers 153 and 666 in Hebrew Genesis 1: http://nl.linkedin.com/in/sylvius )

The number 153 namely is gematria of "eglayim" double calf ("egel" = calf, related to "igul" = circle), to be found in Ezekiel 47:10,

And it shall come to pass, that fishers shall stand by it from En-gedi even unto En-eglaim; there shall be a place for the spreading of nets; their fish shall be after their kinds, as the fish of the Great Sea, exceeding many.

En-gedi = עֵין גֶּדִי= "ayin-17" = Omikron
En-eglaim = עֵין עֶגְלַיִם = "ayin-153" = Omega.

So it's about the rebuidling of the temple on the third day (the number 153 belonging to the third day)

John 2:19,
Jesus answered and said unto them, Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up

I tried to explain:
http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/showthread.php?152252-Haot-the-sign

sylvius

10-02-2012, 04:21 AM

This is the birthfigure i did draw for my oldest daughter, the Alphaomega:

http://i138.photobucket.com/albums/q262/suivlys/Alfaomega.jpg

She is 28 by now,

So you can figure how long I walk around with it already ...

(By the time of her birth I didn't invent yet the number 153, only the number 666 ).

sylvius

10-02-2012, 04:31 AM

This is also a nice figure, one that fits better to the OP:

http://i138.photobucket.com/albums/q262/suivlys/kadosh.jpg

It figures the number 733 = (7 x 73) + (6 x 37)

sylvius

10-02-2012, 11:21 AM

Strange thing:

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

Pantocrator or Pantokrator (from the Greek Παντοκράτωρ) is a translation of one of many Names of God in Judaism. When the Hebrew Bible was translated into Greek as the Septuagint, Pantokrator was used both for YHWH Tzevaot "Lord of Hosts" and for El Shaddai "God Almighty".

YHWH Tzevaot being the name on the shield above.

"kadosh-kadosh-kadosh-YHWH-tzevaot"

Isaiah 6:3,
קָדוֹשׁ קָדוֹשׁ קָדוֹשׁ יְהוָה צְבָאוֹת

It's only that LXX has here:
ἅγιος ἅγιος ἅγιος κύριος σαβαωθ

παντοκράτωρ is to be found in LXX Amos 3:13 and 4:13.

Whether there are more places I don't know.
I got no concordance.

And note this:

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

In the New Testament, Pantokrator is used once by Saint Paul (2 Cor 6:18). Aside from that one occurrence, the author of the Book of Revelation is the only New Testament author to use the word Pantokrator. The author of Revelation uses the word nine times, and while the references to God and Christ in Revelation are at times interchangeable, Pantokrator appears to be reserved for God alone.

Richard Amiel McGough

10-02-2012, 11:25 AM

Greek NT writings of the Jews?

Oh my. So you deny that the NT was written by Jews? Peter, Paul, James and John ... weren't Jews? Or didn't write the NT?

Your comments are from the outer limits dude.

I checked it, you are right that the defective spelling occurs more than once.

Well done. We should always check the facts. :thumb:

הָאוֹת, "haot" = the sign

Said to be the 23rd (missing) letter.

http://www.hadafah.com/haot.htm

Yep - that is the essence of the rabbinical delusion. Invent everything from the mist of "ed" like the "23rd" letter even as they deny the most plain and obvious facts of all reality. Not really an admirable use of intellect in my estimation.

My assertion is that Omega in the saying : "I am the Alpha and the Omega" stands for the 23rd letter, i.e. that Omega is the sign.

Yes, of course. You make up whatever you like. The mystery is why you believe any of it.

And more, that the 153 large fish of John 21:1 constitute "the sign".

(me being the proud and obstinate inventor of the NT numbers 153 and 666 in Hebrew Genesis 1: http://nl.linkedin.com/in/sylvius )

What are you talking about? You didn't "invent" anything. You merely stated to simple observations that any number of people may have noticed before.

The number 153 namely is gematria of "eglayim" double calf ("egel" = calf, related to "igul" = circle), to be found in Ezekiel 47:10,

And it shall come to pass, that fishers shall stand by it from En-gedi even unto En-eglaim; there shall be a place for the spreading of nets; their fish shall be after their kinds, as the fish of the Great Sea, exceeding many.

En-gedi = עֵין גֶּדִי= "ayin-17" = Omikron
En-eglaim = עֵין עֶגְלַיִם = "ayin-153" = Omega.

I was always impressed by those identities.

So it's about the rebuidling of the temple on the third day (the number 153 belonging to the third day)

John 2:19,
Jesus answered and said unto them, Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up

Non sequitur, as usual.

I tried to explain:
http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/showthread.php?152252-Haot-the-sign

You published five posts in that thread and didn't get a single answer. Must be frustrating.

sylvius

10-02-2012, 11:38 AM

sylvius

10-02-2012, 11:44 AM

http://i138.photobucket.com/albums/q262/suivlys/Alfaomega.jpg

This is the sign, Hebrew "haot".
"alef-tav" is not the sign...

Richard Amiel McGough

10-02-2012, 11:47 AM

Oh my. So you deny that the NT was written by Jews? Peter, Paul, James and John ... weren't Jews? Or didn't write the NT?
You wrote:
" But the symbolic meaning carries over and is perfectly understood as being the same as Aleph/Tav. This is obvious because it is found in the Greek NT writings of the Jews who were steeped in the symbolic meaning of the Hebrew OT. "

Ok, where to be found?
Revelation 1:8 I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the ending, saith the Lord, which is, and which was, and which is to come, the Almighty.

This verse shows that Alpha and Omega is a symbol of the totality - from beginning and end - just like Aleph Tav. And it relates it to the Hebrew name of God YHVH which is a sort of convergence of the three tense of the Hebrew word "to be" -

There was
There is
The will be

http://biblewheel.com/images/hayah.gif (Hayah)
http://biblewheel.com/images/havah.gif (Havah)
http://biblewheel.com/images/yahi.gif (Yahi)

I discuss this in my article on the Number 543 (http://biblewheel.com/gr/gr_543.asp) which is the value of ehyeh asher ehyeh (I will be what I will be). The Greek expression in the NT fits perfectly with the Hebrew conception of God.

Richard Amiel McGough

10-02-2012, 11:49 AM

http://i138.photobucket.com/albums/q262/suivlys/Alfaomega.jpg

This is the sign, Hebrew "haot".
"alef-tav" is not the sign...

What makes you think a picture of ten points connected with lines is a "sign" of anything?

sylvius

10-02-2012, 12:39 PM

What makes you think a picture of ten points connected with lines is a "sign" of anything?

It is the Alpha in the Omega, the "A" in the "O",
Omega standing for the 23rd missing letter (of Hebrew alphabet).

Why ten?

It maybe could also have been shown in a pentagram.

I thought the name of God as 10-5-6-5 would not have been there if not a letter "hey" (=5) was added to "shishi" -- the one "5" implying the second "5" of the name.

because creation was completed with "yom hashishi", "yom hashishi" meant "rest" =
Sabbath. The seven letters to be seen as the seven lights of the menorah)

sylvius

10-02-2012, 12:47 PM

Revelation 1:8 I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the ending, saith the Lord, which is, and which was, and which is to come, the Almighty.

This verse shows that Alpha and Omega is a symbol of the totality - from beginning and end - just like Aleph Tav. And it relates it to the Hebrew name of God YHVH which is a sort of convergence of the three tense of the Hebrew word "to be" -

Rather poor , since you said:
But the symbolic meaning carries over and is perfectly understood as being the same as Aleph/Tav. This is obvious because it is found in the Greek NT writings [/B]of the Jews.

You just come up with your own exposures.

Richard Amiel McGough

10-02-2012, 01:09 PM

Rather poor , since you said:
But the symbolic meaning carries over and is perfectly understood as being the same as Aleph/Tav. This is obvious because it is found in the Greek NT writings of the Jews.

You just come up with your own exposures.

What are you talking about? Revelation 1:8 is part of the NT.

Revelation 1:8 I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the ending, saith the Lord, which is, and which was, and which is to come, the Almighty.

It relates to Hebrew thought concerning Aleph Tav. This is common knowledge. Your criticism fails, as usual.

sylvius

10-02-2012, 10:52 PM

What are you talking about? Revelation 1:8 is part of the NT.

Revelation 1:8 I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the ending, saith the Lord, which is, and which was, and which is to come, the Almighty.

It relates to Hebrew thought concerning Aleph Tav. This is common knowledge. Your criticism fails, as usual.

What then is the Hebrew thought concerning Aleph Tav?

According to Alcalay there is an expression: "meialef v'ad tav", which seems to be mere translation of "from A to Z "

But that is not the same as "I am the Alpha and the Omega".

Revelation 1:8,
καὶ συνετελέσθησαν ὁ οὐρανὸς καὶ ἡ γῆ καὶ πᾶς ὁ κόσμος αὐτῶν

Interesting is what the lexicon says:

Ω,n \{o}
1) the interjection, O!

ὁ ὢν καὶ ὁ ἦν καὶ ὁ ἐρχόμενος is not translation of or the same as "ehyeh asher ehyeh".

It says something about time and eternity.

Like said already before:
There seem to be oceans of time, time past and time ahead. The miracle is the now, that we live now, that today is now, and not five, ten, hundreds, thousands, millions years ago.

Revelation 21:6,

καὶ εἶπέν μοι, Γέγοναν. ἐγώ [εἰμι] τὸ Ἄλφα καὶ τὸ *)=ω, ἡ ἀρχὴ καὶ τὸ τέλος. ἐγὼ τῷ διψῶντι δώσω ἐκ τῆς πηγῆς τοῦ ὕδατος τῆς ζωῆς δωρεάν.

ἀρχή, we have seen to have double meaning, it can mean both beginning and principle thing.
τέλος idem dito.
It being the root word of LXX Genesis 2:1,

καὶ συνετελέσθησαν ὁ οὐρανὸς καὶ ἡ γῆ καὶ πᾶς ὁ κόσμος αὐτῶν

Note also,
πηγή,n \{pay-gay'}
1) fountain, spring 2) a well fed by a spring,

translates Hebrew "ed" ("1-4") of Genesis 2:6,

πηγὴ δὲ ἀνέβαινεν ἐκ τῆς γῆς καὶ ἐπότιζεν πᾶν τὸ πρόσωπον τῆς γῆς

Revelation 22:13,

ἐγὼ τὸ Ἄλφα καὶ τὸ Ὦ, ὁ πρῶτος καὶ ὁ ἔσχατος, ἡ ἀρχὴ καὶ τὸ τέλος.

ὁ πρῶτος καὶ ὁ ἔσχατος, doesn't mean "the first and the last letter"

It is after Isaiah 44:6,.

כֹּה-אָמַר יְהוָה מֶלֶךְ-יִשְׂרָאֵל וְגֹאֲלוֹ, יְהוָה צְבָאוֹת: אֲנִי רִאשׁוֹן וַאֲנִי אַחֲרוֹן, וּמִבַּלְעָדַי אֵין אֱלֹהִים
So said the Lord, the King of Israel and his Redeemer the Lord of Hosts, "I am first and I am last, and besides Me there is no God.

LXX:
οὕτως λέγει ὁ θεὸς ὁ βασιλεὺς τοῦ Iσραηλ ὁ ῥυσάμενος αὐτὸν θεὸς σαβαωθ ἐγὼ πρῶτος καὶ ἐγὼ μετὰ ταῦτα πλὴν ἐμοῦ οὐκ ἔστιν θεός

Chris Ellsworth

10-02-2012, 11:14 PM

http://img.techpowerup.org/121003/wheel_sepher_yetzirah.jpg

Richard Amiel McGough

10-03-2012, 12:16 AM

I made one of those ten years ago:

http://biblewheel.com/images/231Gates.gif

From my old article called 231 Gates (http://biblewheel.com/Wheel/231Gates.asp). It played an important role in my discovery of the Bible Wheel:

http://biblewheel.com/intro/images/colorBW_500.jpg

sylvius

10-03-2012, 12:29 AM

I made one of those ten years ago:

http://biblewheel.com/images/231Gates.gif

From my old article called 231 Gates (http://biblewheel.com/Wheel/231Gates.asp).

The "wheel" is the Omega (as 23rd letter).

The 23rd letter being the white space that surrounds the black letters, the white parchment on which the letters are written with black ink, "black fire on white fire".

Omega = "ayin gadol" -- spiritual eye.

Omikron = "ayin katan" -- the physical eye (that always spies for pretty women).

Greek letter Omikron coincides Hebrew letter "ayin", one of the twelve simple letters; so Omega as 23rd letter would be the 13th simple letter.

Chris Ellsworth

10-03-2012, 07:54 AM

Though if you learn how to draw :)

http://img.techpowerup.org/121003/star_37d.jpg

:signthankspin:

sylvius

10-03-2012, 11:36 AM

I can't forbid, you are right.

One thing:
It isn't "One Lord", but "The Lord is one" .

It is not about counting Lords, like counting sheep (which is boring).

I found some interesting thing:

http://www.alsadiqin.org/en/index.php?title=Islam_and_Judaism:_the_early_years

The True Meaning of Jihad. http://www.alsadiqin.org/history/The%20True%20Meaning%20of%20Jihad.pdf (document under construction)
The conquest of Israel, Jerusalem and the Rebuilding of the Temple for the Jews. Research into the roots and context of Jihad as "Y-H Echad" as related to Sanctification of the Name, or Kiddush Hashem. A historical analysis of the derivation of Islam within the context of Mecca (home to a Ptolemaic-Sadducean Universal religion) and Medina (home to Jewish militancy, the last remnants of the Great Revolts).

which reminds of my Yom Hashishi, found in 1981, which means 31 years of struggle.

Richard Amiel McGough

10-03-2012, 11:47 AM

Though if you learn how to draw :)

http://img.techpowerup.org/121003/star_37d.jpg

:signthankspin:
Did you draw that mandala? It's a fascinating combination of the I Ching, Hindu mandala, and Sacred Geometry (Star of David). I used the I Ching a lot as a guide many years ago (late 1980s) when I was traveling the country on a "vision quest" - it works great when all paths are open.

The central hexagram is number 40: Thunder over Water = Deliverance.

Here the movement goes out of the sphere of danger. The obstacle has been removed, the difficulties are being resolved. Deliverance is not yet achieved; it is just in its beginning, and the hexagram represents its various stages.
THE JUDGMENT
DELIVERANCE.
The southwest furthers.
If there is no longer anything where one has to go,
Return brings good fortune.
If there is still something where one has to go,
Hastening brings good fortune.

This refers to a time in which tensions and complications begin to be eased. At such times we ought to make our way back to ordinary conditions as soon as possible; this is the meaning of "the southwest." These periods of sudden change have great importance. Just as rain relieves atmospheric tension, making all the buds burst open, so a time of deliverance from burdensome pressure has a liberating and stimulating effect on life. One thing is important, however: in such times we must not overdo our triumph. The point is not to push on farther than is necessary. Returning to the regular order of life as soon as deliverance is achieved brings good fortune. If there are any residual matters that ought to be attended to, it should be done as quickly as possible, so that a clean sweep is made and no retardations occur.

THE IMAGE
Thunder and rain set in:
The image of DELIVERANCE.
Thus the superior man pardons mistakes
And forgives misdeeds.

A thunderstorm has the effect of clearing the air; the superior man produces a similar effect when dealing with mistakes and sins of men that induce a condition of tension. Through clarity he brings deliverance. However, when failings come to light, he does not dwell on them; he simply passes over mistakes, the unintentional transgressions, just as thunder dies away. He forgives misdeeds, the intentional transgressions, just as water washes everything clean.

Richard Amiel McGough

10-03-2012, 11:51 AM

I found some interesting thing:

http://www.alsadiqin.org/en/index.php?title=Islam_and_Judaism:_the_early_years

Wow - that's a fascinating site! The common heritage of Judaism and Islam. Thanks.

which reminds of my Yom Hashishi, found in 1981, which means 31 years of struggle.
Perhaps it would be less of a struggle if you tried to formulate your thesis in complete sentences and lucid prose. Have you ever tried to write an explanation that filled a few paragraphs so a reader could know what you are really trying to say? I think that would really help.

sylvius

10-04-2012, 04:12 AM

Perhaps it would be less of a struggle if you tried to formulate your thesis in complete sentences and lucid prose. Have you ever tried to write an explanation that filled a few paragraphs so a reader could know what you are really trying to say? I think that would really help.
\

It is no merchandise

sylvius

10-04-2012, 10:03 AM

\

It is no merchandise

I realized that Revelation plays with it:

Revelation 13:16-17

Also it causes all, both small and great, both rich and poor, both free and slave,[a] to be marked on the right hand or the forehead, so that no one can buy or sell unless he has the mark, that is, the name of the beast or the number of its name.
Revelation 21:6,

To the thirsty I will give from the spring of the water of life for free (without payment)

δωρεάν, that's a nice word.

without cost, as a free gift;
for nothing, needlessly, for no purpose (Galatians 2:21, I do not nullify the grace of God, for if righteousness were through the law, then Christ died for no purpose) ;
without cause, for no reason (John 15:25, But the word that is written in their Law must be fulfilled: â€˜They hated me without a cause.â€™ - after Psalms 35:19; 69:5, שֹׂנְאַי חִנָּם, "sin'ai chinnam", They that hate me without a cause).

Richard Amiel McGough

10-04-2012, 10:15 AM

\

It is no merchandise

It is no anything if you can't even say what it is.

sylvius

10-04-2012, 10:23 AM

It is no anything if you can't even say what it is.

I did say already a thousand times.

Richard Amiel McGough

10-04-2012, 10:38 AM

I did say already a thousand times.

Really? Great. Then all you need to do is quote what you wrote. What could be easier?

sylvius

10-04-2012, 11:02 AM

Really? Great. Then all you need to do is quote what you wrote. What could be easier?

"To the thirsty I will give from the spring of the water of life for free"

Is about the "ed" of Genesis 2:6, the "1-4", gematria 5, like lettervalue of "hey", the letter that was added to "shishi".

But who is thirsty? --

Richard Amiel McGough

10-04-2012, 11:06 AM

"To the thirsty I will give from the spring of the water of life for free"

Is about the "ed" of Genesis 2:6, the "1-4", gematria 5, like lettervalue of "hey", the letter that was added to "shishi".

But who is thirsty? --

Yes, I know all that. But what does it mean? Why is it important? And why should anyone think that an incidental word like "ed" should have so be the basis of a whole metaphysical system. It all looks made up from bits and pieces picked up from here and there.

I have no idea what your primary thesis is. On the one hand you say you believe Jesus is Messiah, on the other hand you contradict the NT on many points. It all seems like confusion to me.

sylvius

10-04-2012, 11:48 AM

Yes, I know all that. But what does it mean? Why is it important? And why should anyone think that an incidental word like "ed" should have so be the basis of a whole metaphysical system. It all looks made up from bits and pieces picked up from here and there.

I have no idea what your primary thesis is. On the one hand you say you believe Jesus is Messiah, on the other hand you contradict the NT on many points. It all seems like confusion to me.

"ed" is the principle of resurrection

Genesis 2:5-6, And a mist ascended from the earth and watered the entire surface of the ground and the Lord God formed man of dust from the ground

"formed" written with two letters "yud"

Rashi:

formed: [וַיִּיצֶר, with two â€œyuds,â€ 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, twoâ€œyudsâ€ are not written in [the word וַיִּצֶר describing their creation. â€” [from Tan. Tazria 1]

Richard Amiel McGough

10-04-2012, 12:45 PM

"ed" is the principle of resurrection

Genesis 2:5-6, And a mist ascended from the earth and watered the entire surface of the ground and the Lord God formed man of dust from the ground

"formed" written with two letters "yud"

formed: [וַיִּיצֶר, with two â€œyuds,â€ 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, twoâ€œyudsâ€ are not written in [the word וַיִּצֶר describing their creation. â€” [from Tan. Tazria 1]
Rashi:

Two yods "hint at" whatever anyone wants to make up. Your explanations are not compelling in the least.

sylvius

10-04-2012, 12:59 PM

Two yods "hint at" whatever anyone wants to make up. Your explanations are not compelling in the least.
Before goes verse 5,

Now no shrub of the field was yet on the earth, neither did any herb of the field yet grow, because the Lord God had not brought rain upon the earth, and there was no man to work the soil.

Hebrew "terem" is used,

Rashi:

Every טֶרֶם in Scripture has the meaning of â€œnot yet,â€ and it does not meanâ€œbefore,â€ and it cannot be made into a verb form, to say הִטְרִים, as one says הִקְדִּים

so "ed" is the principle of time.

Hebrew "rega" means indivisible moment, the smallest unit of time.

Gematria 273, same as of "arba", four.

273 = 21 x 13.
13 gematria of "echad", one.

thus is "rega"an expression of "ed" --

And to this alludes Paul in 1Corinthians 15:51-52.

(Note that Paul also mentions two bodies, like Rashi does.)

sylvius

10-05-2012, 12:51 AM

"Merchandise" is an edenic, I learned form
http://www.edenics.org/

Market, from Hebrew "machar" = to sell.

Dutch "markt"

Dutch "marktkraam" (= market stall) is double edenic, since "kraam" also can be traced as coming from Hebrew "machar"

Hebrew for to buy, acquire = "kanah"
Genesis 4:1,
And the man knew his wife Eve, and she conceived and bore Cain, and she said, "I have acquired a man with the Lord."
קָנִיתִי אִישׁ, "kaniti ish"= I have bought a man

A rather obscure verse, at least the interpretations differ.
Rashi;

And the man knew:וְהָאָדָם יָדַע, "v'haAdam yadah", [This took place], prior to the above episode, before he sinned and was banished from the Garden of Eden. Also the conception and the birth [took place before], for if it were written: וַיֵדַע אָדָם, v'yadah haAdam" it would mean that after he had been banished, he had sons. â€” [from Sanh. 38b]

Joseph on the contrary was sold:
Genesis 37:28,

Then Midianite men, merchants, passed by, and they pulled and lifted Joseph from the pit, and they sold Joseph to the Ishmaelites for twenty silver [pieces], and they brought Joseph to Egypt.
Qוַיִּמְכְּרוּ אֶת יוֹסֵף, "vayimkru et Yoseph", "and they sold Yosef", making merchandise out of him.

Rashi:

The sons of Jacob [pulled] Joseph out the pit and sold him to the Ishmaelites, and the Ishmaelites to the Midianites, and the Midianites to Egypt. [From Midrash Asarah Harugei Malchuth]

The NT betrayal of Jesus by Judas might well be after this.

Greek word used is παραδίδωμι = hand or give over, betray, deliver, sell.

Mark 10:33-34,
ὅτι Ἰδοὺ ἀναβαίνομεν εἰς Ἱεροσόλυμα, καὶ ὁ υἱὸς τοῦ ἀνθρώπου παραδοθήσεται τοῖς ἀρχιερεῦσιν καὶ τοῖς γραμματεῦσιν, καὶ κατακρινοῦσιν αὐτὸν θανάτῳ καὶ παραδώσουσιν αὐτὸν τοῖς ἔθνεσιν καὶ ἐμπαίξουσιν αὐτῷ καὶ ἐμπτύσουσιν αὐτῷ καὶ μαστιγώσουσιν αὐτὸν καὶ ἀποκτενοῦσιν, καὶ μετὰ τρεῖς ἡμέρας ἀναστήσεται.
â€œSee, we are going up to Jerusalem, and the Son of Man will be delivered over to the chief priests and the scribes, and they will condemn him to death and deliver him over to the Gentiles. 34 And they will mock him and spit on him, and flog him and kill him. And after three days he will rise.â€

German has a nice word for it;
"verÃ¤uÃŸern" = dispose, alienate, transfer property
root "aussen" = external, exterior, outer, outside

OIW the selling of Jesus is an ongoing process.

Gospelpreachers being kind of merchants, the gospel being their merchandise, their language being the language of market vendors.

sylvius

10-05-2012, 01:59 AM

Strange thing, Rashi on Numbers 3:46,

The firstborn among them who require redemption-these are the two hundred and seventy-three in excess of the Levites; from them you shall take five shekels per head. Such was the sale [price] of Joseph, the firstborn of Rachel, [for the price was] twenty silver pieces [i.e., twenty dinarim, four of which equal a sela]. [Gen. Rabbah 84:18]
273 we saw as gematria of רֶגַע, "rega", the indivisible moment (yoctosecond).

"five shekels per head", חֲמֵשֶׁת שְׁקָלִים לַגֻּלְגֹּלֶת, "ch'meishet sh'kalim lagulgolet"

From which you can know that also the biblewheel is a coin :winking0071:

"twenty dinarim, four of which equal a sela" : showing a 1:4 ratio.

sylvius

10-05-2012, 02:23 AM

The promised land being occupied by the seven nations of Canaan -

i.e. by merchants.

כְּנַעִנִי . k'na'ani" = merchant.

Genesis 12:6,
. And Abram passed through the land, until the place of Shechem, until the oak of Moreh, and the Canaanites were then in the land.

"Moreh" = teacher -- so he came to the teacher-oak.

Rashi:

and the Canaanites were then in the land: He [the Canaanite] was gradually conquering the Land of Israel from the descendants of Shem, for it fell in Shemâ€™s share when Noah apportioned the land to his sons, as it is said (below 14: 18):â€œAnd Malchizedek the king of Salem.â€ Therefore, (below verse 7): And the Lord said to Abram: To your seed will I give this land. I am destined to restore it to your children, who are of the descendants of Shem. [from Sifra, end of Kedoshim]

which sheds light on Genesis 14:19,
And he blessed him, and he said, "Blessed be Abram to the Most High God, Who possesses heaven and earth.

"Who possesses heaven and earth" = קֹנֵה שָׁמַיִם וָאָרֶץ
, "koneh shamayim vaarets"
He bought it with his own life..

sylvius

10-05-2012, 04:16 AM

The secret of time:

1 Corinthians 15:51-52

ἰδοὺ μυστήριον ὑμῖν λέγω: πάντες οὐ κοιμηθησόμεθα, πάντες δὲ ἀλλαγησόμεθα, ἐν ἀτόμῳ, ἐν ῥιπῇ ὀφθαλμοῦ, ἐν τῇ ἐσχάτῃ σάλπιγγι: σαλπίσει γάρ, καὶ οἱ νεκροὶ ἐγερθήσονται ἄφθαρτοι, καὶ ἡμεῖς ἀλλαγησόμεθα

ἄτομος - that cannot be cut in two, or divided, indivisible.

i.e. You cannot go on dividing the second ad infinitum.

http://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nanoseconde

100 second s
10-3 millisecond ms
10-6 microsecond Âµs
10-9 nanosecond ns
10-12 picosecond ps
10-15 femtosecond fs
10-18 attosecond as
10-21 zeptosecond zs
10-24 yoctosecond ys

There is a hard core in time, called eternity.
Time doesn't run away (like sand through your fingers)

Water is symbol of time. (you even can know from Genesis 2:6)

Or even the letter "mem", written in full with open "mem" at the beginning and closed "mem" at the end.

This also being "the secret of Daniel", "sod Daniel", closed "mem" turning into outstreched "nun"

sylvius

10-05-2012, 12:33 PM

"ed" is also the principle of all thought and speech, that must be why you cannot reflect it. (It is "beyond speech").

Genesis 2:5,
וְכֹל שִׂיחַ הַשָּׂדֶה טֶרֶם יִהְיֶה בָאָרֶץ
"v'chol siach hasadeh terem yiyeh baarets"
"and all the shrub of the field when it was not yet on the earth"

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

Gematria 318 coincides the number of Abraham's trained servants with whom he gained victory over the four kings in favor of the five (Genesis 14:14)

sylvius

10-06-2012, 12:18 AM

"siach" is a hobby-horse of mine,

Google:
https://www.google.nl/search?q=siach+gematria+318&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:nl:official&client=firefox-a

www.theologyweb.com/campus/showthread.php?95980-quot-siach-hasadeh-quot

wow, got it.

almost at least.

That was more than five years ago.

It remains a brainteaser!

sylvius

10-06-2012, 11:49 PM

LXX has for Genesis 2:5,

καὶ πᾶν χλωρὸν ἀγροῦ πρὸ τοῦ γενέσθαι ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς καὶ πάντα χόρτον ἀγροῦ πρὸ τοῦ ἀνατεῖλαι

χλωρός
green

χόρτος
herb, grass

where Hebrew has:

וְכֹל שִׂיחַ הַשָּׂדֶה טֶרֶם יִהְיֶה בָאָרֶץ וְכָל עֵשֶׂב הַשָּׂדֶה טֶרֶם יִצְמָח

So maybe Mark 6:39 refers to Genesis 2:5,

καὶ ἐπέταξεν αὐτοῖς ἀνακλῖναι πάντας συμπόσια συμπόσια ἐπὶ τῷ χλωρῷ χόρτῳ.

compelling because of;

συμπόσιον,n \{soom-pos'-ee-on}
1) a drinking party, entertainment 1a) of the party itself, the guests 1b) rows of guests

that might be after LXX Genesis 2:6,

πηγὴ δὲ ἀνέβαινεν ἐκ τῆς γῆς καὶ ἐπότιζεν πᾶν τὸ πρόσωπον τῆς γῆς

ποτίζω= to give to drink

Hebrew:

וְאֵד יַעֲלֶה מִן הָאָרֶץ וְהִשְׁקָה אֶת כָּל פְּנֵי הָאֲדָמָה

וְהִשְׁקָה, "v'hishkah", from שקה = to give to drink (while "shatah"= to drink -- the "quf" turned into "tav", "quf" 100, "tav" 400).

Mark 9:41,

Ὃς γὰρ ἂν ποτίσῃ ὑμᾶς ποτήριον ὕδατος ἐν ὀνόματι ὅτι Χριστοῦ ἐστε, ἀμὴν λέγω ὑμῖν ὅτι οὐ μὴ ἀπολέσῃ τὸν μισθὸν αὐτοῦ

very interesting:

ποτήριον = cup, drinking vessel.

Mark 14:23,

καὶ λαβὼν ποτήριον εὐχαριστήσας ἔδωκεν αὐτοῖς, καὶ ἔπιον ἐξ αὐτοῦ πάντες.

Mark 14:36,
[
καὶ ἔλεγεν, Αββα ὁ πατήρ, πάντα δυνατά σοι: παρένεγκε τὸ ποτήριον τοῦτο ἀπ' ἐμοῦ: ἀλλ' οὐ τί ἐγὼ θέλω ἀλλὰ τί σύ.

Green = Hebrew "yerek", to be found in Genesis 9:3,

כָּל רֶמֶשׂ אֲשֶׁר הוּא חַי לָכֶם יִהְיֶה לְאָכְלָה כְּיֶרֶק עֵשֶׂב נָתַתִּי לָכֶם אֶת כֹּל

Green = yellow mixed with blue

is said to be the color of revelation:

http://www.emethatorah.com/feasts/shavuot

Among the oldest of customs is the decorating of the synagogue and homes with greenery and the eating of dairy products. The origins for both these traditions are obscure; however, there are many theories for the greenery. Some believe that the homes and synagogues should be decorated by greenery because the area around the mountain of Sinai was green. This is based on the interpretation of Exodus 34:3 where it states â€neither let the flocks and herds grazeâ€