The Genesis Seal

[catsmate]

<snip>And what about the examples on Page 2 of this thread, which show that The God Delusion and Flim-Flam share similar properties? I'm sure The Origin of the Species, Principles of Geology, On THe Origin of the Phyla, and many other texts would have similar results using your algerithm. Why are those found in Genesis special, but those found in all of the other texsts on Earth irrelevant?

When bible/torah codes were first popularised about fifteen years ago there were a number of analyses of War and Peace that showed similar "results".
It's all rather silly.

 

[catsmate]

That's a shame, since the JREF forum needs people who are willing to assess rationally the evidence, the whole evidence and nothing but the evidence.

It's been assessed and is rubbish.

 

[Nay_Sayer]

I wasn't aware Phil Collins was such a big fan of Phoca vitulina

 

[Kingfisher2926]

Given that you said earlier that Genesis has word breaks after 14, 21 and 28 characters (I think I've remembered that correctly), does that not imply a 7x7 square/spiral should be used? Why did you settle on the 8x8 grid, especially as using 64 characters cuts off in the middle of a word?

While I am not the most knowledgeable when it comes to ancient/classical esoterica, I can't for the life of me rememember any similar grid from Egyptian, Babylonian or Greek art. Where did you get the 8 x 8 grid from? Which number system is that based on? I'm not quite sure which base those different cultures used. And I do suppose if there were anything to it the grid would probably be based on the culture specific numerology which I seem to remember differs.

Agatha,
The 8x8 is a bit like musical octaves, where the eighth note is similar to the first, except for being one octave higher. The word breaks in that 28-letter verse suggested to split the text into four blocks of seven. When you put them together as a square perimeter, the last letter of a block meets the first letter of the next block, making an 8-letter side of the square. This is best illustrated by the alternate shading I used in Figure 2 in post #119.

I agree with you that it looks aesthetically wrong for the text in the middle of the square to fall into a black hole. Especially as the word where that occurs is the name of Elohim (God). But couldn't that be a hint that God is simultaneously present in our world as well as his own? I'm not really in a position to provide a definitive answer to this. But my post #289 shows evidence that Jewish authorities have gone down the same road, and wholeheartedly accepted the consequences as a window into God's mind. It is not necessary to agree with their interpretation, but I take comfort from their attempt at one.

Moss,
If you look at Table A in my post#289, you will see that the Q-vals (Q is qatan = small) repeat the sequence 1 to 9. There is no zero value, but there is still a sense that the Hebrew language recognises a base-10 approach. Notice also the way that the Std values of the second cycle runs from 10 to 90 in steps of 10.
It is known that the Babylonians used a base-60 system for both commerce and astronomy. The latter has bequeathed to us the use of 360 degrees in a circle and 6o minutes in an hour, and so on. But by the time of the Jews' Babylonian Exile, there was already experiments taking place in India on a form of decimal arithmetic. It may be significant that they, too, did not hit on the concept of zero, either as a positional place-holder or as a number in its own right. We may never know accurately how and exactly when decimal arithmetic spread through the civilised world. But it was already happening when the Hebrew Torah first hit the streets.

 

[Nay_Sayer]

I agree with you that it looks aesthetically wrong for the text in the middle of the square to fall into a black hole. Especially as the word where that occurs is the name of Elohim (God). But couldn't that be a hint that God is simultaneously present in our world as well as his own? I'm not really in a position to provide a definitive answer to this. But my post #289 shows evidence that Jewish authorities have gone down the same road, and wholeheartedly accepted the consequences as a window into God's mind. It is not necessary to agree with their interpretation, but I take comfort from their attempt at one.

No.

Anyone can produce any number of random letters,In which using various methods you can gleam anything you want from.

It's plain and simple pareidolia

 

[Guybrush Threepwood]

Kingfisher, have you read this thread? What did you think of the ideas in it?

 

[EvilQuest]

Kingfisher:

All you seem to have done here is to construct an arbitrary grid (why "8x8"?) with the first 64 characters from a particular part of the bible, and then gone on to demonstrate that reading those characters in a variety of different directions you can effectively re-create those self same words that relate directly back to the very text from which you selected the characters in the first place. You then, having shown that, then imprint your own interpretation on it to imply that this is some kind of new discovery and you proceed to present this as if it's generating new information. Surely if all all you're seeing are re-constitued words shown differently, then i must ask why you would be surprised at seeing words that you already know by definition will certainly be there(using your system), and why you would then consider it necessarily worthy of note. I would consider it a matter of logic surely. And that's discounting random words that would crop up anyway that may also have some reference back to the same source. I'm pretty sure that if i could construct one of those fancy grids that you seem so fond of here in this thread, then i could just as easily demonstrate that the lyrics to Motorhead's classic metal anthem "Ace of Spades" properly re-arranged would actually, believe it or not, make direct reference to the words "ace" and "spades" somewhere within it. ie. referencing the very source material from which it was extracted in the first place. Oh and if it didn't quite extend into the chorus I could always "up" the character count a bit to make sure that those words definitely turned up regardless. It's all abitrary. You have set the rules in advance knowing what you want to see, and knowing that you will see those results by definition because it was you who set up the specific parameters in the first place. You seem to be trying to prove something that you already know. Something we all know. Oh and the references to Pythagoras amount to nothing more than supposition on your part. You seemed to suggest that you would show a proper connection there but in reality you "speculated". (as we all can)

I am wondering why you are doing this.

If this isn't just pattern-seeking on your part just to try to "confirm" something you are already committed to, then i would respectfully request that you present your "endgame" sooner rather than later. That's assuming, of course, that you actually have an endgame.

If you're looking for commercial advantage, and are effectively using this forum as a testing ground then so far you have not yet demonstrated that you have a receptive audience here. However i can assure you that there is a huge market out there and you could make some money out of it assuming you have no problem with inconvenient things like "reality" or "truth".

I respect your hard work and commitment, sir, but i fear you have backed yourself into your own personal corner.

EQ

 

[Brainache]

Kingfisher:

All you seem to have done here is to construct an arbitrary grid (why "8x8"?) with the first 64 characters from a particular part of the bible, and then gone on to demonstrate that reading those characters in a variety of different directions you can effectively re-create those self same words that relate directly back to the very text from which you selected the characters in the first place. ...

EQ

That seemed strange to me too, why stop after the first 64 characters. Why not do the whole thing?

Just because you find some "highly compressed" "information" in the 8 x 8 grid, doesn't mean a grid 20,000 x 20,000(how many characters in the entire text?) wouldn't also contain similar things, hell you might find a picture of Santa Claus made from Yods or something.

Come on, get cracking! You've wasted years on one Pixel! You have to get the Big Picture. I'm sure there would be some software that could do it in seconds...

 

[Lukraak_Sisser]

I hope it follows from what I have already said here, that the Hebrew Tanakh (Old Testament) may not, as Jews would have the world believe, have been entirely their sole preserve. The Hebrew language was not introduced to the world by Abraham. So, the biblical creation account, containing the Genesis Seal, could easily have been known first to other cultures.

As Marduk will happily tell you should he deign to visit this thread, the jewish creation myth is an evolution of the one present in babylonia and similar areas. Repeat your trick with the same part of the text in cuniform and get the exact same results and you might be on to something

 

[Brainache]

As Marduk will happily tell you should he deign to visit this thread, the jewish creation myth is an evolution of the one present in babylonia and similar areas. Repeat your trick with the same part of the text in cuniform and get the exact same results and you might be on to something

I agree that it would have to be done in the original written language, but if the first five (?) books of the OT were written by the top Jewish Scribes in Babylon around 550bc, is it impossible that they might have included some kind of acrostic mathematics based code? Wasn't Babylon famous for that?

I know this is sounding like the Bible code. I don't mean there is actually anything in this, but just imagine a 6th century BC Einstein working as a scribe along side other great mathematical thinkers who have a message to communicate to anyone who can master their code... These Scribes just happen to be the guys in charge of the first written account of the Hebrew myths...

and the Dan Brown Novel just writes itself...



(I know so little about Dan Brown, I hope he hasn't done this one already)

 

[Twiler]

Agatha,
The 8x8 is a bit like musical octaves, where the eighth note is similar to the first, except for being one octave higher. The word breaks in that 28-letter verse suggested to split the text into four blocks of seven. When you put them together as a square perimeter, the last letter of a block meets the first letter of the next block, making an 8-letter side of the square. This is best illustrated by the alternate shading I used in Figure 2 in post #119.

I agree with you that it looks aesthetically wrong for the text in the middle of the square to fall into a black hole. Especially as the word where that occurs is the name of Elohim (God). But couldn't that be a hint that God is simultaneously present in our world as well as his own? I'm not really in a position to provide a definitive answer to this. But my post #289 shows evidence that Jewish authorities have gone down the same road, and wholeheartedly accepted the consequences as a window into God's mind. It is not necessary to agree with their interpretation, but I take comfort from their attempt at one.

Moss,
If you look at Table A in my post#289, you will see that the Q-vals (Q is qatan = small) repeat the sequence 1 to 9. There is no zero value, but there is still a sense that the Hebrew language recognises a base-10 approach. Notice also the way that the Std values of the second cycle runs from 10 to 90 in steps of 10.
It is known that the Babylonians used a base-60 system for both commerce and astronomy. The latter has bequeathed to us the use of 360 degrees in a circle and 6o minutes in an hour, and so on. But by the time of the Jews' Babylonian Exile, there was already experiments taking place in India on a form of decimal arithmetic. It may be significant that they, too, did not hit on the concept of zero, either as a positional place-holder or as a number in its own right. We may never know accurately how and exactly when decimal arithmetic spread through the civilised world. But it was already happening when the Hebrew Torah first hit the streets.

The core problem here is that you haven't defined what is significant, and what isn't significant. Under these circumstances, you can just interpret whatever you see in whatever way you want.

I'll attempt to illustrate this:

If I roll a dice six times and receive the following result:

146521

I could claim that the dice must have super-powers, because there is a 1 at the start, and a 1 at the end.

If I rolled the following result:

524521

I could claim that the dice must have super-powers, because there is a 5 at the start of the first set of three, and a 5 at the start of the second set of three.

Do you understand the concept? Do you think that there is a difference between these observations and your observations concerning the Genesis Seal?

 

[Kingfisher2926]

That seemed strange to me too, why stop after the first 64 characters. Why not do the whole thing?

Just because you find some "highly compressed" "information" in the 8 x 8 grid, doesn't mean a grid 20,000 x 20,000(how many characters in the entire text?) wouldn't also contain similar things, hell you might find a picture of Santa Claus made from Yods or something.

Come on, get cracking! You've wasted years on one Pixel! You have to get the Big Picture. I'm sure there would be some software that could do it in seconds...

The Hebrew Torah is often presented (mostly by Jews) as a coherent divine revelation. And it seems to matter that it consists of exactly 304805 characters. As such, it can all be contained in a 553x553 square, with room to spare.
Despite the fact that I prefer to work on the 64-letter Genesis Seal, I do in fact have the whole Torah as a data file. And I have developed my own software that will present it all, or any part of it, as an expanding spiral. This is the same as the G3 and G4 aspects of the Genesis Seal (which I have not yet presented to this forum), only bigger.
I doubt that I shall ever accomplish a detailed analysis of the whole Torah Square, but my software does allow me to make specific searches. I shall describe just one example.
The middle book of the Torah, known to Christians as Leviticus, is called Vayiqra in Judaism. This 5-letter Hebrew word is the first to occur in that book; in other words it is an incipit, just as the Enuma Elish is named from its opening text. Anyway, to the point... In the Hebrew language, Vayiqra is a relatively long word, and it contains a letter (the Qof) that is used less than most. So, I wondered if there would be even a single emergent occurrence of Vayiqra in the 553x553 Torah Square. I was quite surprised to find that there is just a single occurrence, and that it has an interesting property. Bear in mind that an emergent word may be oriented in any of 7 alternative ways - I am excluding the direction of the original text in any given location. Or we can reduce the valid orientations to just four if we accept that each may flow in either direction (eg top-to-bottom or bottom-to-top). But the possibilities are huge if the precise starting point is taken into account. So I was amazed to find the single emergent occurrence of the name of the Torah's middle book sitting precisely within a diagonal of the square, a long way downstream of the square's origin, at the centre.
I have found a few, more elaborate constructs much closer to the origin, but nothing as densely packed as in the first 64 letters.

 

[Kingfisher2926]

The core problem here is that you haven't defined what is significant, and what isn't significant. Under these circumstances, you can just interpret whatever you see in whatever way you want.

I'll attempt to illustrate this:

If I roll a dice six times and receive the following result:

146521

I could claim that the dice must have super-powers, because there is a 1 at the start, and a 1 at the end.

If I rolled the following result:

524521

I could claim that the dice must have super-powers, because there is a 5 at the start of the first set of three, and a 5 at the start of the second set of three.

Do you understand the concept? Do you think that there is a difference between these observations and your observations concerning the Genesis Seal?

I do think there is a difference. Those two sequences don't have a context; in other words, they are generated by something you are doing, not by something that is pre-existent. On the other hand, if you obtained a sequence of 55455525755550552535555595550556455555, you should be suspecting that there is an unseen influence, especially if you were losing money as a result. In this example, I would suspect the die to be loaded behind the side that shows a 2.

 

[Twiler]

I do think there is a difference. Those two sequences don't have a context; in other words, they are generated by something you are doing, not by something that is pre-existent. On the other hand, if you obtained a sequence of 55455525755550552535555595550556455555, you should be suspecting that there is an unseen influence, especially if you were losing money as a result. In this example, I would suspect the die to be loaded behind the side that shows a 2.

Why is that important?

 

[Donn]

I do think there is a difference. Those two sequences don't have a context; in other words, they are generated by something you are doing

Ah, jeez, then pretend someone else rolled the dice and gave you the numbers.
If that's out, then pretend they were written on parchment with burned edges in faded brown ink that was left in a pirate cove by someone two hundred years ago.

 

[stokes234]

I do think there is a difference. Those two sequences don't have a context; in other words, they are generated by something you are doing, not by something that is pre-existent. On the other hand, if you obtained a sequence of 55455525755550552535555595550556455555, you should be suspecting that there is an unseen influence, especially if you were losing money as a result. In this example, I would suspect the die to be loaded behind the side that shows a 2.

Well, you still haven't shown that the number of combinations of words you found in this block of text is higher than a control group, and so nobody has any reason yet to believe that the chance of finding words as you do is anything like as low as the chance of getting that many fives on a non-loaded dice. But even if it is a higher than normal number of words, you've still got texas sharpshooter fallacy unless you can extract a coherent message and tell us something new and interesting from the text.

Read this case : http://www.badscience.net/2010/04/lucia-de-berk-a-martyr-to-stupidity/

And tell us if you understand why we can be sure she was innocent, despite 7 people dying on her watch.

 

[Donn]

Wow. Glad Lucia got justice and was cleared of all charges in 2010. Talk about being in the wrong place when a giant hand is painting a bulls-eye.

 

[Kingfisher2926]

I'm about to try using the Quote facility for the first time, as Agatha once suggested. Wish me luck.

 

[Rasmus]

The Hebrew Torah is often presented (mostly by Jews) as a coherent divine revelation. And it seems to matter that it consists of exactly 304805 characters. As such, it can all be contained in a 553x553 square, with room to spare.
Despite the fact that I prefer to work on the 64-letter Genesis Seal, I do in fact have the whole Torah as a data file. And I have developed my own software that will present it all, or any part of it, as an expanding spiral. This is the same as the G3 and G4 aspects of the Genesis Seal (which I have not yet presented to this forum), only bigger.
I doubt that I shall ever accomplish a detailed analysis of the whole Torah Square, but my software does allow me to make specific searches. I shall describe just one example.
The middle book of the Torah, known to Christians as Leviticus, is called Vayiqra in Judaism. This 5-letter Hebrew word is the first to occur in that book; in other words it is an incipit, just as the Enuma Elish is named from its opening text. Anyway, to the point... In the Hebrew language, Vayiqra is a relatively long word, and it contains a letter (the Qof) that is used less than most. So, I wondered if there would be even a single emergent occurrence of Vayiqra in the 553x553 Torah Square. I was quite surprised to find that there is just a single occurrence, and that it has an interesting property. Bear in mind that an emergent word may be oriented in any of 7 alternative ways - I am excluding the direction of the original text in any given location. Or we can reduce the valid orientations to just four if we accept that each may flow in either direction (eg top-to-bottom or bottom-to-top). But the possibilities are huge if the precise starting point is taken into account. So I was amazed to find the single emergent occurrence of the name of the Torah's middle book sitting precisely within a diagonal of the square, a long way downstream of the square's origin, at the centre.
I have found a few, more elaborate constructs much closer to the origin, but nothing as densely packed as in the first 64 letters.

So just because I like saying it: Bible Code.

Now you re really doing the exact same thing.

 

[Kingfisher2926]

Why is that important?

Well, you still haven't shown that the number of combinations of words you found in this block of text is higher than a control group, and so nobody has any reason yet to believe that the chance of finding words as you do is anything like as low as the chance of getting that many fives on a non-loaded dice. But even if it is a higher than normal number of words, you've still got texas sharpshooter fallacy unless you can extract a coherent message and tell us something new and interesting from the text.

Read this case : http://www.badscience.net/2010/04/lucia-de-berk-a-martyr-to-stupidity/

And tell us if you understand why we can be sure she was innocent, despite 7 people dying on her watch.

The opening words of Genesis either do contain underlying cryptic content, or they do not. There is no middle way. The text in question has existed for many centuries, so using it is not like throwing dice.
Stokes234, I suggest it is untennable to keep suggesting that the Genesis Seal has fewer combinations of [emergent] words than in a control sample. Iy not only has many such words, but they are always conceptually related and in close proximity, with added visual appeal.
In a recent post, I described an analysis (admittedly superficial) that I have carried out in the same way on the entire Torah text. I found patterns that have similar characteristics, but so much dispersed that they are what you would expect to find in any such grid of Hebrew text. If you like, you may consider this to be the ultimate control text.
Incidentally, it was by searching for the three-letter word for 'light' in that 553x553 Torah Square that I arrived at the likelihood of finding that emergent word in the 8x8 G1 Square. The odds are about 5 to 1 against finding a single case, and 25 to 1 against finding two examples.