…snip…However, I do not consider this to be valid since the research was based on the fact that the imagery and the events do match. This was the premise on which the research was based. The conclusion was an attempt to explain why the imagery and the events matched.
No. You seem to be missing several steps in the research process and just commenting upon the later Multiple Attestation Criterion.
You have also picked up on the wrong premise, and linked it with a different conclusion.
The “search for matching imagery” as you call it was part of the
later Multiple Attestation Criterion to see whether Pegg’s claim of ‘history from modern cd-roms being documented in ancient texts’ was valid
Between 1996 and 1998 Ronald Pegg found modern historical events documented in ancient texts, both at the surface level and in an encoded manner. That was his first observation.
When these claims were investigated, amazingly, more examples of ‘modern history in ancient texts’ were found.
If no supportive evidence from modern cd-roms or history books was to be found, then Pegg’s discovery would have been deemed just a coincidence. But supportive evidence WAS found and it was concluded that ancient texts do in fact contain extracts of actual history from specific modern history books. So we moved on to the next step – looking for more associated evidence.
Upon further investigation it was found that the common link between the documentation of future historical events in ancient texts was an encounter with God or his angels. It is documented in ancient texts that these angels used certain ‘books’ to show and tell the ancient prophets whom then documented their encounters.
At this stage it was proposed by Pegg that GOD’s Angels travelled through time and took the named printed modern history books back to the ancient prophets and told and showed them the enclosed information – as documented by various named ancient prophets. This was the first theory. The accounts in the religious stories themselves seemed to support this concept.
But this can not be just a ‘one off’ theory. If this theory was correct for the Old Testament, then at other encounters with angels or gods, there should be the same evidence of modern history documented. As I have previously posted - as well as historical events being documented in ancient texts, associated with these there were certain sequences of animal imagery cited (the ‘future visions’).
Pegg used his hypothesis to predict what additional evidence should exist only if the hypothesis is true. Basically, at all encounters with gods, GOD, or Angels, various combinations of animal descriptions (the ‘visions’), Persian Gulf War data, named people and the historical events – should appear in ancient texts.
He investigated over 25 ancient texts, and there in the ancient descriptions – often covered over by mistranslations or religious rhetoric – were the same animal ‘visions’, war, and future historical events documented. The “Visions” and “Signs” in all these ancient texts were found to be descriptions of sequences of imagery from at least three cd-roms – Ancients, Grolier, and RedShift2.
The discovered evidence thus supported his claim that “modern historical accounts and cd-rom imagery are described in ancient texts where ‘gods, God, or Angels’ tell the prophet of future things”.
The premise for the research wasn’t based on the idea that ‘the imagery and the events do match’ but ‘What supportive evidence is there that indicates that modern historical accounts in ancient texts as cited by the ‘gods, God, or Angels’ are not just coincidences’.
It was found that where modern historical events were documented in ancient texts, so too were descriptions of the imagery from the cd-roms.
The concept of criterion of multiple attestation declares that the more independent sources there are, the more confident historians feel about reconstructing the past.
This is the point at which you have been introduced to the results of the research. Many of the ‘matching’ examples are provided on the WBD website.
So on to the next step. Gods, Angels, or something else ?
Pegg found that some of the religiously described gods, GOD, and angels were not of a divine nature, but referred to the icons from the three cd-roms (the seals/doorways which were often depicted as animals).
This destroyed his first theory that it was GOD’s Angels who took back the modern books and compact disks.
The other ‘angels’ who are documented by the named prophet as specifically talking to and showing them ‘future things’ were therefore also not of a divine nature.
During his investigations Pegg found computer parts documented in the Old Testament, and when Strong’s Concordance was employed to return the mistranslated and misinterpreted Latin and Greek meanings back to the original Hebrew/Aramaic, WHY all this is documented in ancient texts was eventually revealed.
The conclusion wasn’t (as you call it) “an attempt to explain
why the imagery and the events matched” but ‘why’ and ‘how’ the imagery and history from the cd-roms ARE documented in ancient texts.
The discovery of more than 30 separate cultural examples of ‘matching imagery with ancient descriptions’ throughout various eras was the supportive Multiple Attestation process of the investigations – not the premise of the research.