The Genesis Seal

[RobDegraves]

but if it goes the other way, it could change the world

How?

To be honest, I no longer really care much about this thread. I am just writing as a last ditch effort to help in case you are simply mentally ill rather than trolling.

You are just playing at word games but you are convinced it's something mystical and special.

Not only have you not demonstrated anything significant, either historical (even though you avowed to prove that it has historical significance) or even religious, but you seem to have spent a great deal of time trying to find hidden messages in your imaginary system. I think you should seek professional advice from a qualified psychologist. I'm quite serious. I don't think that everyone here discussing this with you is being helpful.

 

[dafydd]

How?

To be honest, I no longer really care much about this thread. I am just writing as a last ditch effort to help in case you are simply mentally ill rather than trolling.

You are just playing at word games but you are convinced it's something mystical and special.

Not only have you not demonstrated anything significant, either historical (even though you avowed to prove that it has historical significance) or even religious, but you seem to have spent a great deal of time trying to find hidden messages in your imaginary system. I think you should seek professional advice from a qualified psychologist. I'm quite serious. I don't think that everyone here discussing this with you is being helpful.

I'm leaning toward troll. I hope he is a troll, for his sake.

 

[Complexity]

You're entitled to that position. But since my experience is exactly opposite what you think - I've found my life and community enriched beyond measure by the lifestyle and study - I'm willing to endure the consequent tragedy of being called superstitious by some anonymous dude on the internet.

This is really a derail, since the OP in no way reflects what I study or live.

Not a derail - you recently posted the following in this thread:

What makes you think the two are mutually exclusive?

in response to tsig's question:

Wringing reality from old texts is counterproductive when the world is right there.

I suggest that your behavior and activities predisposes you to disagree with tsig's assertion.

That you are an apologist for giving superstition any credence is regretable but not surprising.

We don't disagree on everything, but on this subject I can't take you any more seriously than the OP writer.

 

[stokes234]

Not only have you not demonstrated anything significant, either historical (even though you avowed to prove that it has historical significance) or even religious, but you seem to have spent a great deal of time trying to find hidden messages in your imaginary system. I think you should seek professional advice from a qualified psychologist. I'm quite serious. I don't think that everyone here discussing this with you is being helpful.

I'm inclined to agree. Becoming this invested in a nonsense project does kind of imply something worth discussing with a professional. Perhaps take this work to a skilled psychiatrist and see if they can explain to you why you're seeing patterns here. None of our words are making any difference.

 

[David Swidler]

Not a derail - you recently posted the following in this thread:




in response to tsig's question:

If you insist. It was probably a mistake to accept the derail by responding to tsig.

I suggest that your behavior and activities predisposes you to disagree with tsig's assertion.

No argument there, but since when does intensive study of anything perforce negate living in the "real world"? It takes great presumption to declare that a field of study necessarily distances the student from engagement with reality; in fact the whole endeavor is aimed at deepening that engagement.

That you are an apologist for giving superstition any credence is regretable but not surprising.

We don't disagree on everything, but on this subject I can't take you any more seriously than the OP writer.

*Shrug*. I can't expect you to change your orientation toward something you aren't interested in exploring. My education, upbringing and continued study of the stuff the OP purports to discuss have made it clear to me, as a student of the material, that he speaks out of ignorance, and that's all I came here to argue. Whether you accept my "authority" on the matter is entirely out of my hands.

And as for the characterization as superstition, all I can say is you see what you predispose yourself to see. If you wish to call the study of the experience of relationships - which is really what Kabbalah is about - superstition, so be it.

 

[Dancing David]

Right, here is what I plan to do. To save time - perhaps months - the first stage will not be as ambitious as my X-years work on Genesis 1:1-2. Instead, I shall start with what is the natural beginning in a project of this sort. I shall look only for the kind of superficial qualities of some sample texts, to see whether any of them exhibit the sort of 'clues' that made me want to look deeper in the case of the Genesis Seal. Regardless, of that stage, I shall look deeper anyway.
First, I shall select a few (say four) verses of the Torah that are widely separated. I suggest that verses of 28 letters will be an optimum size, without overtaxing my patience or stamina. If you prefer, I can provide a list of all Torah verses that consist of 28 letters and let you guys choose my sample for me. But I want to include any that may have immediate, superficial merit in case that is a hint from the author to dig deeper.
Next, I intend to skip the literary dimension and go straight to the numeric. The literary angle can be disproportionately time consuming (for me, anyway); yet there seems to be enough interesting numerical content in the Genesis Seal for that to be a worthwhile benchmark. In any case, if I post the formatted numerical data to this thread, I hope there will be some willing members who are able to help with the critical examination of the data, perhaps more than could undertake to analyse a Hebrew wordsearch square.

Any initial thoughts on my plan, so far?

You need to use control samples tehe xact same size as your case sample, therefore teh square has to be gnerated with teh same number of letters, other wise it is not a goof sample.

So take four 64 letter phrases from the torah, I would say from the start of random chapters, then preform the same sort of analysis on your sample squares that you have on the case square.

 

[Nay_Sayer]

I get your point, but your initial 'word' isn't even a proper word. To be comparable to the Genesis Seal you would have to

1. start with a valid piece of prose,
2. make sure it can be re-arranged in a special way that reveals the content you intend,
3. better still, make sure it can be formatted in two or more ways that reveal related content in comparable structural arrangements,
4. ensure the right way to perform the rearrangements is communicated, and
5. incorpoate some clues into the same prose that achieve said communication.

After all that, you have to step out of the picture so that no-one knows how it all began, and generate some sense of mystery.

The point was to illustrate that if I can "get" that many religious words from sheer random gibberish,Then it would be no effort to get the same from any given chunk of text.

 

[Kingfisher2926]

The point was to illustrate that if I can "get" that many religious words from sheer random gibberish,Then it would be no effort to get the same from any given chunk of text.

Yes, but you have not laid down any rules for the way you pick letters from the pile, You just take them from anywhere you please.

In the Genesis Seal, the structure of the various squares fixes the positions of the letters, which determines how letters come together. I don't know if you have seen post#492, but it shows that distinct structures tend to hug specific parts of the squares, even through all four of them (I have not yet presented the G4 Square). I have called that effect the Principle of Reserved Locations, which evidently applies to only four specific 3x3 zones.

 

[slingblade]

Yes, but you have not laid down any rules for the way you pick letters from the pile, You just take them from anywhere you please.

Hello? Care to offer even a hint of how this stupid puzzle will change the world?

Or perhaps tone down the AMAZING STUPENDOUS HYPERBOLE!!!!!1!!! just a hair?

 

[EvilQuest]

Right, here is what I plan to do. To save time - perhaps months - the first stage will not be as ambitious as my X-years work on Genesis 1:1-2. Instead, I shall start with what is the natural beginning in a project of this sort. I shall look only for the kind of superficial qualities of some sample texts, to see whether any of them exhibit the sort of 'clues' that made me want to look deeper in the case of the Genesis Seal. Regardless, of that stage, I shall look deeper anyway.
First, I shall select a few (say four) verses of the Torah that are widely separated. I suggest that verses of 28 letters will be an optimum size, without overtaxing my patience or stamina. If you prefer, I can provide a list of all Torah verses that consist of 28 letters and let you guys choose my sample for me. But I want to include any that may have immediate, superficial merit in case that is a hint from the author to dig deeper.Next, I intend to skip the literary dimension and go straight to the numeric. The literary angle can be disproportionately time consuming (for me, anyway); yet there seems to be enough interesting numerical content in the Genesis Seal for that to be a worthwhile benchmark. In any case, if I post the formatted numerical data to this thread, I hope there will be some willing members who are able to help with the critical examination of the data, perhaps more than could undertake to analyse a Hebrew wordsearch square.

Any initial thoughts on my plan, so far?

That line would bother me. You offer the option for others to choose the sample but then seem to place a condition on which you would agree to include them. If you're doing this properly shouldn't you be willing to accept any given verses unconditionally?

 

[Nay_Sayer]

Yes, but you have not laid down any rules for the way you pick letters from the pile, You just take them from anywhere you please.

In the Genesis Seal, the structure of the various squares fixes the positions of the letters, which determines how letters come together. I don't know if you have seen post#492, but it shows that distinct structures tend to hug specific parts of the squares, even through all four of them (I have not yet presented the G4 Square). I have called that effect the Principle of Reserved Locations, which evidently applies to only four specific 3x3 zones.

Alright:
Every Letter is assigned a Number A=1 B=2 C=3 etc...

Dice 1 is used to determine if I add the face numbers or use them to represent a larger number(2+6 would be 26 in that scenario) for the letters I choose,Even=Add Odd=Literal

Dice 2 is used for Letters that have values that end in 7,8,9 and 0

Lets assume I roll a 5,OK,I now know that the letters will be from 11-26

Next I would repeat the first step but change the outcome Even=7,8 Odd=9,0

I would also roll dice to see how many vowels there would be in all.

That is the methodology I used for my "word".

I can eliminate all these rules and still get something that sounds meaningful from something as benign as the ingredients from a soup can.

 

[Marduk]

Yes, but you have not laid down any rules for the way you pick letters from the pile, .

whereas you made up your rules after the fact

hello, hello, are you incapable of responding to any of my posts
seems youre making the rules as to what posts youre going to answer after the fact too

after the fact = confirmation bias = cherry picking = nonsense

 

[Kingfisher2926]

yes, it has no control
if we say select 4 verses from your list and you then find the same with them as you did with your original text you will simply proclaim it supernatural, I expect you would even end up saying something like "at first there were no hits, but when I changed the arrangement (14 times), it suddenly went all supernatural again"

what you need is to include texts from other religions as well as secular texts and see if it works there as well, if so it would prove to be normal

I'm also not happy letting someone who is already suffering from confirmation bias do the testing, you can be included sure, but you need at least three testers, one who has no religious belief as a control, one like you who is a monotheist and one from a different religious background
and they are not to test the texts by their own choosing, the texts should be allocated at random

at the end of the day, this will simply prove what we know already and what you are unable to accept because of your emotional investment

I’m game, but where will the three testers come from? And I hope they will be deliberately employing confirmation bias, to show that to be the underlying agency.
I am happy to take a back seat, but must insist on having free access to sources, to be able to check for interference. If the tests are carried out in either English or Hebrew, I’d be happy for the test to encompass both a literary and numeric dimension. But it would speed things up to concentrate on the numbers. If even that fails to reveal anything of note, despite use of deliberate confirmation bias, then the (presently disputed) cryptic content of the Genesis Seal should be deemed to be the result of deliberate design by its original author.
If the test is carried out on an English text, would we treat diphthongs as their separate letters? And would we adopt the same schema of qatan letter values as for Hebrew. That is, repeated cycles of the values 1 to 9, from A to Z, ending with Z=8.
We would have to come to some agreement about how to assess the results. For example, Figures 7 and 9 in my post#446 could set the sort of standard to be achieved. These show examples of supposed underlying mathematical and geometrical attributes of the biblical source, with complex interrelationships and in visually distinctive structures. I presume their presence is not disputed, only their significance as proof of deliberate design.
Does that sound fair to you?

 

[Marduk]

I’m game, but where will the three testers come from? And I hope they will be deliberately employing confirmation bias, to show that to be the underlying agency.
I am happy to take a back seat, but must insist on having free access to sources, to be able to check for interference. If the tests are carried out in either English or Hebrew, I’d be happy for the test to encompass both a literary and numeric dimension. But it would speed things up to concentrate on the numbers. If even that fails to reveal anything of note, despite use of deliberate confirmation bias, then the (presently disputed) cryptic content of the Genesis Seal should be deemed to be the result of deliberate design by its original author.
If the test is carried out on an English text, would we treat diphthongs as their separate letters? And would we adopt the same schema of qatan letter values as for Hebrew. That is, repeated cycles of the values 1 to 9, from A to Z, ending with Z=8.
We would have to come to some agreement about how to assess the results. For example, Figures 7 and 9 in my post#446 could set the sort of standard to be achieved. These show examples of supposed underlying mathematical and geometrical attributes of the biblical source, with complex interrelationships and in visually distinctive structures. I presume their presence is not disputed, only their significance as proof of deliberate design.
Does that sound fair to you?

not even remotely, no

 

[Kingfisher2926]

whereas you made up your rules after the fact

hello, hello, are you incapable of responding to any of my posts
seems youre making the rules as to what posts youre going to answer after the fact too

after the fact = confirmation bias = cherry picking = nonsense

I think that's a bit unfair. It's taken me all evening to find the right words to answer another of yout posts. Also, I'm having more than usual problems with my home router. I know I am way behind in making proper replies to everyone, but you must admit I'm posting fairly high volumes. I'm only human.

 

[Complexity]

No argument there, but since when does intensive study of anything perforce negate living in the "real world"? It takes great presumption to declare that a field of study necessarily distances the student from engagement with reality; in fact the whole endeavor is aimed at deepening that engagement.

Anything can be intensively studied. The problem comes when something that is rooted in superstition is studied by a believer who thinks that his efforts are worthwhile or that his delusions should be spread to others. I think that this is what you are doing.

*Shrug*. I can't expect you to change your orientation toward something you aren't interested in exploring. My education, upbringing and continued study of the stuff the OP purports to discuss have made it clear to me, as a student of the material, that he speaks out of ignorance, and that's all I came here to argue. Whether you accept my "authority" on the matter is entirely out of my hands.

I think that is harmful to have you study the torah and the kabbalah as if they contain anything of value (apart from some historical references in the torah). The world would be a far better place if these works were buried and lost.

Stop taking this nonsense seriously and quit corrupting others.

And as for the characterization as superstition, all I can say is you see what you predispose yourself to see. If you wish to call the study of the experience of relationships - which is really what Kabbalah is about - superstition, so be it.

Superstitious nonsense.

Shame on you.

 

[Kingfisher2926]

That line would bother me. You offer the option for others to choose the sample but then seem to place a condition on which you would agree to include them. If you're doing this properly shouldn't you be willing to accept any given verses unconditionally?

I can concede that. But I have doubts that I can persuade anyone on this thread to be a part of what they say is required. I can give it a go solo, but as Marduk said, he would not trust my judgement. In the end, that may be my only option. I just wonder, if everyone wants to prove me wrong, why not do so properly with specific examples of confirmation bias, instead of keep saying it must be done.

 

[Marduk]

I just wonder, if everyone wants to prove me wrong, why not do so properly with specific examples of confirmation bias, instead of keep saying it must be done.

when you first posted this thread half a dozen people rushed to show you that it worked on all texts, not just cherry picked ones. You ignored them all.

now you're pretending that didn't happen

do you understand why everyone is so very annoyed at you or not ?

 

[Kingfisher2926]

You need to use control samples tehe xact same size as your case sample, therefore teh square has to be gnerated with teh same number of letters, other wise it is not a goof sample.

So take four 64 letter phrases from the torah, I would say from the start of random chapters, then preform the same sort of analysis on your sample squares that you have on the case square.

I think I'd better just go ahead and do that. I've been told it must be done, but that I am not qualified to do so. Catch 22.

 

[Complexity]

I think I'd better just go ahead and do that. I've been told it must be done, but that I am not qualified to do so. Catch 22.

Throw away your diagrams and notes.

Your idea is superstitious nonsense and nothing useful or interesting will come from it.

Find something else to do, preferably something that involves improving your mind.