• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

The Genesis Seal

Tricky said:
But Genesis was originally written in Greek, so any points about the Hebrew translation are useless.
Click to expand...
Not so. The Hebrew form existed long before any Greek translation. But I am happy to run with your broad thrust. You seem to be saying that the Hebrew creation account may not have started out as a Hebrew script. There is no hard evidence one way or the other, but biblical scholarship asserts that there is good evidence that it existed first as an oral tradition, and that it either built upon earlier myths of the Ancient Near East or, more likely, was a polemic protest against them.
What we have now, however, is a long-established text that exhibits some remarkable properties. I would certainly like to hear what the scholarly community make of that. I would like to think the Genesis Seal will prove useful in clarifying the history of the Hebrew Bible.
 
slingblade said:
Funny...he calls us his "fellow skeptics," and yet he seems never to have shaken hands with skepticism...
Click to expand...
I understand skepticism to involve a rational and critical assessment of what at first appears improbable. Sadly, it sometimes takes the form of a slash and thrust aversion to anything that challenges the status quo.
 
Kingfisher2926 said:
I understand skepticism to involve a rational and critical assessment of what at first appears improbable. Sadly, it sometimes takes the form of a slash and thrust aversion to anything that challenges the status quo.
Click to expand...

Do you think that any of your opponents here have not made a rational and critical assessment of the evidence? If this is the case, which ones, and why.
 
Last edited:
Kingfisher2926 said:
I understand skepticism to involve a rational and critical assessment of what at first appears improbable. Sadly, it sometimes takes the form of a slash and thrust aversion to anything that challenges the status quo.
Click to expand...

The sataus quo has never been challenged by a word game, don't flatter yourself. But good luck with the book contract, there are enough eejits out there who will buy this sort of thing.
 
Those posts already approach the Time Cube in clarity - there's no problem generating content for a book.
 
Do I need to refill my swimming pool with oil to prepare for the return of the Corn Dogs? This is a good time of year, since it's starting to get cold around these parts.
I miss deep-fried corn batter on wieners.
 
Kingfisher2926 said:
I understand skepticism to involve a rational and critical assessment of what at first appears improbable. Sadly, it sometimes takes the form of a slash and thrust aversion to anything that challenges the status quo.
Click to expand...

Forget the persecution complex.

It has been pointed out to you that:

1) The number of coincidences is not very great, if they are supposed to be designed in. You mentioned a cross-word puzzle, yourself; you would find it a very poorly designed crossword puzzle indeed to contain only a handful of real worlds, surrounded by garbage.

2) Your probability calculations are not valid. First of all, to find a a certain letter in only one sector, you must divide with the number of different letters in the text, since it could be any letter. Further, you must divide with the number of sectors that can be arbitrarily assigned to the pattern (bottom half, top half, right half, left half, periphery, central block, to mention some). Likewise, the probability of finding a certain word may be low, but the probability of finding some word is high.

3) Your ordering of the letters is arbitrary. Even within the scope of an 8x8 pattern, there are hundreds of patterns other than the spiral you use that will appear entirely logical. Most of them will yield some interesting coincidences. So even if you did not try out many patterns, but stumbled on this one, it is hardly an improbable result.

Here is your rational and critical assessment. Please relate to it.

Hans
 
Forgive my poor understanding of Hebrew, but is it the case that vowels are not generally in the text in Hebrew writing? Therefore to do the same sort of test with a piece of English writing to look for "emergent words"*, should we skip the vowels completely? I suspect that if one were to do this, it would be easy to pick out relevant words in am English text, when one is free to add in any vowel anywhere.

*Yes, I do realise that this is just Bible Code nonsense with a different way of ordering the letters to start with.
 
Kingfisher2926

I would like to think the Genesis Seal will prove useful in clarifying the history of the Hebrew Bible.
Click to expand...

Well... here's the problem.

I am doing my phd in history.. specifically medieval history... and I'm quite used to looking at codes in texts. Medieval authors, particularly alchemists, theologians and mystics, loved codes and secret messages.

However, when you are looking for codes in texts, you have to be able to determine what is a genuine message and what is just noise that sounds like a message.

1. Probability analysis.

You could generate a block of random letters and you will find meaningful coded messages in it every time. Try it at home ... it's interesting. It doesn't matter how low you think the probability is, it will always happen. It simply demonstrate the flexibility of language and our ability to see patterns.

2. Intent.

The main way to determine whether a message is real or just random is to look at the message and it's intent. Let's say that Albertus Magnus wants to send a message to Thomas Aquinas about the transmutation of base metals to gold. You might see a message in Latin or Greek that said, after laborious decoding of course, "The winged messenger must not be seen before the rosy fingers can be entwined within his phalli"

Well, Mercury is the winged messenger, rosy fingers refers to the dawn and Mercury was sometimes seen with 3 phalli. So.. at dawn mix in the 3rd mercury solution. Tadaa. It makes sense because it's from one alchemist to another and contains instructions on an alchemical process. Messages about fried chicken would be less believable and more likely a coincidence, no matter how remote the probability was.

3. Origin.

Who wrote the text is also significant. Was there a reason for coded messages, a recipient in mind and does it agree with previous research on the subject. A message from Albertus Magnus to Thomas Aquinas makes sense. A message from Herod to Roger Bacon makes a lot less sense.


So... if you want to be taken seriously at all by historians...


1. Don't bother with probability. It's pointless and no one will care. Others, such as Hans above, have also demonstrated your flaws there.

2. Demonstrate that the message imparts some new message intended to supplement the text rather than just repeat it. Saying "And darkness was upon the face of the deep" again is not a message, it's just repetition.

3. Do your homework rather than playing with codes. Do some real historical research. If there is a message, who wrote it, why was it written and when? Show some evidence for your point of view that doesn't hinge on finding patterns in random texts.

Otherwise... find another hobby because you are wasting your time.
 
Last edited:
Kingfisher2926 said:
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.
Click to expand...
Actually, the failure here is yours. Not every claim is entitled to a thorough investigation. You have failed to show, even if everything you have said so far is accurate, why any skeptic should be interested. I look at what you have presented and say meh, so what? I can see how some god-believers could become obsessive about all this. But you cannot seem to see why non-god-believers are not moved by it. It's just not that interesting. It is not informative unless one has the pre-existing bias.
 
Last edited:
Let me try to mop up some clearly well-intentioned criticism about whether the opening words of Genesis include additional cryptic meaning.
First, I do not assert that the additional meaning is a continuous, syntactically correct message. The extra content appears to resemble more a scratchpad in which crucial, later biblical narratives are pre-planned. On the other hand, this does not rule out the Genesis Seal having been fashioned by an intelligent human. In which case, those later narratives might have been contrived much later to agree with a cryptic construct of unknown origin. But one that was undoubtedly revered as beyond the ability of any normal mortal to have contrived.
Second, I can only present the details at a limited rate. So the responses I have received so far are based on a very limited knowledge of the total phenomenon.
Third, the more negative feedback often suggests ideas for assessing the Genesis Seal phenomenon using other sample data. This case is not like the bible code debacle, where equivalent 'content' was discovered in the book Moby Dick. But, in any case, it was the opponents of that hypothesis that provided the ammunition. I have enough on my plate with just the Genesis Seal to be diverted into that kind of black hole.
Fourth, the criticism so far has skilfully sidestepped the fact that revealed content of the Genesis Seal has not only a literary character but is simultaneously and cleverly structured. You will see better what I mean from my next major post.
 
the PC apeman said:
Actually, the failure here is yours. Not every claim is entitled to a thorough investigation. You have failed to show, even if everything you have said so far is accurate, why any skeptic should be interested. I look at what you have presented and say meh, so what? I can see how some god-believers could become obsessive about all this. But you cannot seem to see why non-god-believers are not moved by it. It's just not that interesting. It is not informative unless one has the pre-existing bias.
Click to expand...

Try not to get hung up on the supernatural origin question. The Genesis Seal should have intrinsic interest to anyone wanting to know more about human history. It should be of very wide interest that the Seal phenomenon (even if accidental) has affected some prominent shakers and movers of the past.
 
Call me when it says "Heraclides is ignorant of letters and is not ashamed of his ignorance".
 
It is my intention, as soon as possible, to introduce a second view of the Genesis Seal, known to me as the G2 Square. First, however, I need to extend what we already know about the G1 aspect. So, Figure 3 highlights some important additional features that are not only significant in their own right, but will also serve as a foundation for what comes later.


In this view, the grid and the text it contains are unchanged from Figure 1. The only differences are my own emphasis of individual letters and the removal of the internal borders that had shown the order of the inserted text. All the same, I am being ambitious in the amount of new content I wish to reveal.
In this post, I want especially to demonstrate something I have previously tried to suggest in an information vacuum. This is the way that emergent words in the Genesis Seal tend to group together with their conceptual kindred. So, in this view I have retained the yellow borders on the two copies of aur (light), while adding emphasis to the two, emergent, horizontal, 3-letter words that cross through them. Both are valid Hebrew words, and the rightmost example is the word oob (thick darkness) that I have mentioned a few times already. Note that each copy of ‘light’ with its horizontal partner defines a 3x3 square. And note that the middle of one such square to the middle of the other is a span of 5 letters. It is possible to interpret these components together, as a 3x3x5 box-shape, the same relative dimensions as the Ark of the Covenant.
Now, I know from recent experience that this latest suggestion will prompt cries of derision, which is why I shall point out two additional features of the grid that support my conclusion. One is the word betzer (gold) that is still present as one side of the upper 3x3 facet of the box, relevant because the Ark of the Covenant was coated with a layer of gold. Even more persuasive is the emergent, 4-letter word luchot (tablets) that descends vertically into the interior of the box (letters on grey backgrounds). That is, just as Moses was instructed to place the two tablets of the Ten Commandments into the Ark.

Next, I want to draw attention to another 3x3 cluster, defined by its corner letters, having orange-brown outlines. These letters spell l’natash, meaning ‘for a root’, while the three interior letters on bright green backgrounds spell the emergent word p’riy (fruit). The whole group is centred on the 3-letter word eretz (earth) belonging to the source text. This is the very eretz that had been ‘without form and void’. Since the whole group is sited in the eastern half of the 8x8 grid, there is a good chance it corresponds to a verse of Genesis Chapter 2, which reads: And the Lord God planted a garden eastward in Eden…When I come to present the G2 aspect of the Genesis Seal, we shall see a good reason why the Seal is closely related to the text from two verses later, concerning a river with four heads that …went out of Eden to water the garden… For now, simply note that the top six letters ascending in the grid’s vertical diagonal spell the expression: v’hey nahar, meaning ‘Behold! A river’.
 
Last edited:
Kingfisher2926 said:
Let me try to mop up some clearly well-intentioned criticism about whether the opening words of Genesis include additional cryptic meaning.
First, I do not assert that the additional meaning is a continuous, syntactically correct message.
Click to expand...

That is a very arrogant way of putting it. Of course the criticism is well-intentioned, but you seem to entirely miss its point:

We say that you have not show that there is any intentional message at all.
All you have done is shown that interesting patterns can be manipulated out of this text, in the same way as it can be manipulated out of virtually any sequence of characters.

You are not even NEAR the point where you can start to discuss any purpose of the code. First you need to show that there is a code.

Hans
 
Kingfisher2926 said:
Try not to get hung up on the supernatural origin question. The Genesis Seal should have intrinsic interest to anyone wanting to know more about human history. It should be of very wide interest that the Seal phenomenon (even if accidental) has affected some prominent shakers and movers of the past.
Click to expand...

It may be of interest if you can show that others have noticed the same patterns and let themselves be led by them.

Hans
 
We say that you have not show that there is any intentional message at all.
Click to expand...
That would be because I have hardly scratched the surface so far. But what about after I have shown 50 times as many related emergent content?

All you have done is shown that interesting patterns can be manipulated out of this text, in the same way as it can be manipulated out of virtually any sequence of characters.
Click to expand...
The real point is the vast extent of those coherent patterns that combine structure with literary meaning. Besides, the Genesis Seal is not just 'any sequence of characters' but a well-known literary masterpiece (on several levels).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom