I found God

[MarcUK]

lurking on this website. I'm not joking...I would have posted this in reposnse to an older thread about 666 or 616, but I'd get smacked for bumping.

http://www.chez.com/cosmos2000/Numbers/666_Origins.html

be sure to check out all the links in the sidebar.

how much more proof do we need?

[segovius]

Way off, way off.

:no:

[MarcUK]

Originally posted by segovius
Way off, way off.

:no:

:D come on then smarty pants, what does 666 mean?

[Chris Cuilla]

I didn't realize he was lost.

<rimshot/>

( sorry, couldn't resist )

[MarcUK]

Originally posted by Chris Cuilla
I didn't realize he was lost.

<rimshot/>

( sorry, couldn't resist )

well if no-one else claims him in 30 days, he's yours.

[e1618978]

Originally posted by MarcUK
:D come on then smarty pants, what does 666 mean?

What is 6 x 111?

no, wait,

How many paths must a man walk down?

[MarcUK]

Originally posted by e1618978
What is 6 x 111?

no, wait,

How many paths must a man walk down?

dunno?

[segovius]

Originally posted by MarcUK
:D come on then smarty pants, what does 666 mean?

Well, that would be too easy wouldn't it ? :D

As you have guessed, the Bible is a numerically based cypher. If you ask nicely I shall give you a massive clue on how to decipher it and you will have to work it out from there - although that will take years :devil:

[WhiteRabbit]

I could still smack you for starting a dunb thread.

I think it is all just coincidence. Or planned by whoever wrote the Bible.

[MarcUK]

Originally posted by segovius
Well, that would be too easy wouldn't it ? :D

As you have guessed, the Bible is a numerically based cypher. If you ask nicely I shall give you a massive clue on how to decipher it and you will have to work it out from there - although that will take years :devil:

well "Mr cryptic mystic", you really know how to piss a guy off. :D

How about I tell you which wire to cut to disable my little package :lol:

....mmmm

okay, i'll take the clue. How much grovelling do you need?

[segovius]

Btw - the amulets in the article allegedly from the Berlin Museum are in reality very late examples imo.

This one especially:

http://www.chez.com/cosmos2000/Numbers/Solis_A.jpg

The symbolism is pure 17th century alchemical. There is a crude (ie wrong) Kabbalistic tree of life on the left and the figure between the pillars is again, 17th century Masonic. You will find this particular motif on 18th century Tarot packs. Not earlier.

These amulets are in no way pagan, they are possibly a synthesis of Judaic/Alchemical magic but they were not created by someone who knew what they were talking about - which is probably why the author (who would fall into a similar category unfortunately) seems to place so much stock in them.

This is mumbo-jumbo :D

[MarcUK]

damn you are scary!,

just before I started this thread I was just staring at an image, but had no idea what it was, when I googled Kabbalistic tree of life - up it popped again, and I was just this very minute trying to find a connection between tarot cards/numbers of letters in an ancient alphabet and the number 36.

[segovius]

Originally posted by MarcUK
well "Mr cryptic mystic", you really know how to piss a guy off. :D

How about I tell you which wire to cut to disable my little package :lol:

....mmmm

okay, i'll take the clue. How much grovelling do you need?

Hehe - well you asked for it - starting a thread like this. the curse of 666 and all that.....:D

Ok, you need two books. The King James Bible (only the King James) and an original folio Shakespeare - facsimile obviously or original text. Some texts are different.

Right, that points you in the right direction, here is your clue (you should take this very seriously but we can pretend it's a joke if it helps) - it is a clue to the method:

The KJV was revised in 1610 by team of 46 people.

The revision followed the translation and was purely poetic - ie to make it sound better.

This year (1610) Shakespeare was 46.

In Psalm 46, the 46th word from the top is 'shake'

The 46th word from the bottom is 'spear' (note: there is a word which needs disgarding in this one selah - do not count this word, it is used throughout the KJV as a punctuation mark).

That should keep you busy - it is a puzzle, but you have to find the puzzle first. A double-puzzle hahah :D

[MarcUK]

if you've never ever previously told me the truth, or never ever will again, thats ok, no grudge, but I need to know now, if I work at this, you promise me the answer is available from that clue?

[segovius]

Originally posted by MarcUK
and I was just this very minute trying to find a connection between tarot cards/numbers of letters in an ancient alphabet and the number 36.

High Priestess Isis (http://www2.ida.net/graphics/shirtail/tarot.htm)

[segovius]

Originally posted by MarcUK
if you've never ever previously told me the truth, or never ever will again, thats ok, no grudge, but I need to know now, if I work at this, you promise me the answer is available from that clue?

AN answer is available from that clue but then it depends on the question - mine are different to yours.

In the end it all comes down to belief unless you can find a way of transcending belief which is what the Bible, those amulets, magic and all the rest is all about.

Belief is the play. To really do it you have to die. Really die - just not physically, it's a big thing. Better to play maybe, and crosswords and puzzles are my personal favourite way of playing - yours might be different.

Besides, the answer might be that there is no answer. how would you know if you found that ? It could go on for years.

[MarcUK]

Originally posted by segovius
High Priestess Isis (http://www2.ida.net/graphics/shirtail/tarot.htm)

damn, it was 22 I was looking for, not 78.

btw I was looking here

http://www.crystalinks.com/tarot.html

[MarcUK]

Originally posted by segovius


Besides, the answer might be that there is no answer. how would you know if you found that ? It could go on for years.

thats what I think the answer will be. Infact I almost know it.

Maybe it's like Jason's golden fleece. It's not the fleece thats important, infact it was completely irrelavent, but the wisdom he gained by searching for it.

[segovius]

Originally posted by MarcUK
thats what I think the answer will be. Infact I almost know it.

Maybe it's like Jason's golden fleece. It's not the fleece thats important, infact it was completely irrelavent, but the wisdom he gained by searching for it.

Now I know what book I'll send :D

[MarcUK]

Originally posted by segovius
Now I know what book I'll send :D

what - did I say something stupid?

[ragingloogie]

who would have thought there was a sun god

[MarcUK]

.

[MarcUK]

Originally posted by segovius

Ok, you need two books. The King James Bible (only the King James) and an original folio Shakespeare - facsimile obviously or original text. Some texts are different.



Not quite sure by what you mean by 'folio Shakespeare'. Help?

[dmz]

MarcUk it is past your bedtime.

7 is God, a number used to show completeness.
6 is man (not quite as compete)

666 is the number of man at his most complete, a la 'let us come down and confuse his languages, otherwise NOTHING will be impossible for them'.

[bergz]

God is Dog spelled backwards.

Think about it.

--B

[JimDreamworx]

Love the theory. If only the New Testament was written with a Base 10 system.

[shetline]

I don't know about God, but you found a web page that brings Mozilla to its knees. Safari doesn't seem to have much problem with that page at all, but Mozilla was in and out of spinning-pizza-of-death land just trying to scroll through all of that cheesy animated GIF and JavaScript crap.

[LudwigVan]

Originally posted by segovius
Ok, you need two books. The King James Bible (only the King James) and an original folio Shakespeare - facsimile obviously or original text. Some texts are different.

Right, that points you in the right direction, here is your clue (you should take this very seriously but we can pretend it's a joke if it helps) - it is a clue to the method:

The KJV was revised in 1610 by team of 46 people.

The revision followed the translation and was purely poetic - ie to make it sound better.

This year (1610) Shakespeare was 46.

In Psalm 46, the 46th word from the top is 'shake'

The 46th word from the bottom is 'spear' (note: there is a word which needs disgarding in this one selah - do not count this word, it is used throughout the KJV as a punctuation mark).

That should keep you busy - it is a puzzle, but you have to find the puzzle first. A double-puzzle hahah :D

Francis Bacon called. He wants his cipher back. :p

Originally posted by MarcUK
Not quite sure by what you mean by 'folio Shakespeare'. Help?

The single tome of the complete works of Shakespeare was published in 1623. Because of its size and the paper folding technique (folio), it's referred as the Folio. Here's a sample (http://oll.libertyfund.org/ToC/0615.php).

[AquaMac]

Silly me, I thought 42 was the answer to life the universe and everything.
AquaMac

[BR]

Originally posted by segovius
Hehe - well you asked for it - starting a thread like this. the curse of 666 and all that.....:D

Ok, you need two books. The King James Bible (only the King James) and an original folio Shakespeare - facsimile obviously or original text. Some texts are different.

Right, that points you in the right direction, here is your clue (you should take this very seriously but we can pretend it's a joke if it helps) - it is a clue to the method:

The KJV was revised in 1610 by team of 46 people.

The revision followed the translation and was purely poetic - ie to make it sound better.

This year (1610) Shakespeare was 46.

In Psalm 46, the 46th word from the top is 'shake'

The 46th word from the bottom is 'spear' (note: there is a word which needs disgarding in this one selah - do not count this word, it is used throughout the KJV as a punctuation mark).

That should keep you busy - it is a puzzle, but you have to find the puzzle first. A double-puzzle hahah :D

From Wiki:

Most scholars dismiss claims of Shakespeare's involvement in translating the King James Version, and in particular reject such purported evidence as this example. Notably, the Geneva Bible and several other earlier translations contained the same coincidence, despite several of them being published before or just shortly after Shakespeare's birth.

[segovius]

Originally posted by BR
From Wiki:

Most scholars dismiss claims of Shakespeare's involvement in translating the King James Version, and in particular reject such purported evidence as this example. Notably, the Geneva Bible and several other earlier translations contained the same coincidence, despite several of them being published before or just shortly after Shakespeare's birth.

Which brings us to the character of 'Shakespeare' himself and whether or not he even existed.

Perhaps the greatest summation of the facts of his alleged life is presented by another great writer, Mark Twain, in his
Is Shakespeare Dead? (http://www.shakespeare-oxford.com/shakdead.htm)

Most suggestive of Twain's facts (which are still the sum of our knowledge)are:

There are two entries for the marriage, or 'a' marriage: on 27th November in the Bishop of Worcester's register - WM Shaxpere granted a licence to marry Anne Whateley of Temple Grafton. On 28th November (same register): William Shagspere granted licence to marry Anne Hathwey of Stratford.

There are still only three examples of Shakespeare's alleged handwriting in existence (and yes, they possibly differ) and not a single draft, book or manuscript. Nothing. Nada. This is not the case with any lesser writer (and there are no greater writers) of the same period or earlier.

There is one and only one poem known for sure to be written by the Shakespeare form Stratford in his lifetime. ONLY ONE. We know he wrote it because it was legally attested for his gravestone. Here it is:

Good friend of Iesus sake forbeare
To digg the dust encloased heare:
Blest be ye man yt spares thes stones
And curst be he yt moves my bones.

A sonnet it ain't.

A vast case against the Shakespeare from Stratford having written the plays can be made by a comparison of the plays to the life. The Stratford man was a money-lender for example (this is a matter of record) who was notoriously mean (see his Will) and would sue people at the drop of a hat. However, the writer of the 'Merchant of Venice' in his portrayal of Shylock shows a psychological insight and moral perspective which does not square with this.

Similarly, the Stratford Shakespeare was sued for demanding money with menaces and threatening someone's life. This does not square with 'our' Shakespeare at all.

It is not important who wrote the plays. The question is far more 'why did they write them?' and then 'and why hide their identity so well?'.

[MarcUK]

Originally posted by dmz
MarcUk it is past your bedtime.

7 is God, a number used to show completeness.
6 is man (not quite as compete)

666 is the number of man at his most complete, a la 'let us come down and confuse his languages, otherwise NOTHING will be impossible for them'.

no shit, now perhaps you'd like to ask the question why 6 and 7 are represented as God and Man.

After you've told me, I'll tell you the correct answer. Fire away bad boy.

[MarcUK]

Originally posted by LudwigVan

The single tome of the complete works of Shakespeare was published in 1623. Because of its size and the paper folding technique (folio), it's referred as the Folio. Here's a sample (http://oll.libertyfund.org/ToC/0615.php).

thanks a great help, incidently, I asked a wise friend what a folio shakespeare meant, and he suggested it would be a critique of the style of writing and forms in the text. which makes sense, cool, now I have 2 folios to work at.

[MarcUK]

Originally posted by segovius

Is Shakespeare Dead? (http://www.shakespeare-oxford.com/shakdead.htm)

from your link...

"For the instruction of the ignorant....."

classic :lol: , for when I become a teacher.

edit : read link, a bit of a shocker :wow:

[segovius]

Originally posted by MarcUK
from your link...

"For the instruction of the ignorant....."

classic :lol: , for when I become a teacher.

Yes, it's a good one...:D

Do you need some more clues about the Folio ? :devil:

[MarcUK]

Originally posted by segovius
Yes, it's a good one...:D

Do you need some more clues about the Folio ? :devil:

are we talking folio as in 'the big folio i was given a link to' or folio as in structure and use of language?

[segovius]

Originally posted by MarcUK
are we talking folio as in 'the big folio i was given a link to' or folio as in structure and use of language?

Big folio. First one.

Maybe you don't need to focus on the structure stuff.

[MarcUK]

Originally posted by segovius
Big folio. First one.

Maybe you don't need to focus on the structure stuff.

greeeaaat, thats 944 pages. :mad:

can I take shortcuts on this? next clue required:D

[MarcUK]

I have a hunch.

Suppose the works of Shakespeare are the stories of the bible rewritten for modern times?

BTW. If that's completely stupid, it's because I've never read a word of shakespeare apart from Macbeth which was forced upon me when i was 14 and really, really not interesred.

luckily for dmz, I am going to bed now, it's only 7pm, but I'm completely knocked out.

[MarcUK]

^^^^last post, completely wrong.

Woke up early - had a coffee, had an inspired thought.

ok segovius, I've solved your problem :D, thanks.:)

[Not Unlike Myself]

Reminds me of that bumper sticker.

I FOUND JESUS!
He was behind the sofa cushions with the remote the whole time!

[MarcUK]

looks like the world is waking up...

http://www.thegodmovie.com/trailer/tests/GodWhoWasntThere-Trailer-LG.mov

warning 18MB

and then on 06/06/06

this is coming out

http://www.thebeastmovie.com/trailer/index.html

[sunilraman]

Originally posted by MarcUK
thats what I think the answer will be. Infact I almost know it.

Maybe it's like Jason's golden fleece. It's not the fleece thats important, infact it was completely irrelavent, but the wisdom he gained by searching for it.

bingo.

[segovius]

Once upon a time people came to the conclusion that 'everything is permitted' and that there were no rules.

One of the effects of this was that people just ate whenever they felt like it. Of course they got fat - some even got obese - but as they were in some ways an advanced society and they knew the truth that there is no right or wrong there seemed no problem with being fat. Things were compounded because various companies and business had a vested interest in keeping people eating (and spending) but on the whole people were happy - unfit and ill a lot, but as happy as they could be under the circumstances.

After a few generations these people accepted things as normal, everything was 'the way it's always been' though of course, they lived shorter lives and were less healthy than they could have been but they had nothing to compare it to so they just called it 'the human condition'.

About this time, a certain person started thinking about this 'human condition' and pondered in particular about their own personal obsession with cream cakes. They wondered what would happen if they stopped eating the five or six cakes a day they were addicted to so they tried to give it up. Strangely they found they couldn't and again, they wondered why this might be and it made them all the more determined to knock these cakes on the head.

After much thought (something that was not exactly fashionable in that time) they concluded that if they convinced themselves that cream cakes were 'evil' then they might be able to give them up and so see what life was like without them. So our thinker went to a doctor and asked him to hypnotise him into believing that cream cakes were noxious, wrong and generally to be avoided.

It didn't work at first so the patient went back to the doctor for a stronger dose - this time the suggestion was implanted that if one eat these cakes then 'something terrible would happen' and lo, this did actually work. The patient was cured of addiction to cream cakes ! Of course he knew that they were not really 'evil' and that there would be no 'punishment' but he allowed himself to believe this to achieve his aim.

He went back to thinking and minus the cakes he found he could think clearer. He also realised that he was getting thinner and thinner and one day he saw he was no longer fat.

He thought a lot about this and soon found he had other capacities - he could run, jump, looked and felt better etc. He started to tell other people about his 'method' - of course they laughed at him. Most viewed him as a freak who was ill and of course, as they were happy enough, they denied his method worked - in fact they denied the existence of the capacities of jumping and running full stop. They claimed that he was 'anti cream cakes' and anti fun. That he made up lies that if you ate a cake terrible things would happen and that his 'system' was just a construct to stop people enjoying themselves everyone knew cream cakes weren't evil - and as this was in fact true, then it seemed to prove itself.

Some people however did listen and did believe you could become thin, fit and healthy. These he taught his method in secret so that the fatties couldn't interfere with the process - they were protesting more and more as his system had implications for the whole food industry.

Some of his students didn't have a problem with cream cakes and he allowed them to eat them - of course they could not eat hamburgers or whatever their particular problem was: sweets, biscuits, pasta, whatever. Some of these students did in fact become thin and athletic but the vast majority couldn't do it and started eating their forbidden foods in secret while preaching the opposite.

After our original thinker died, these students - still massive fatties - taught the system and it became very popular. The only problem was it didn't work. This gave more ammo to the original critics who could point to it and say 'look, it's complete rubbish' and of course in a way it was. The students were just getting fatter and claiming they weren't.

Soon even these students fell out. Each claimed they had the original teaching and that 'God would punish you for eating cream cakes'. Others disagreed and fought them tooth and nail - 'no, no, no God will punish you for eating hamburgers and punish the anti-cream cake crowd the most'.

Of course, ordinary capacities such as jumping and running were claimed to be 'divine' and 'superhuman' gifts which you were bestowed if you were 'holy' enough.

And everyone got fatter still.

Other thinkers occasionally arose - but after such a long time they tended to focus on finding links and antecedents between this type of cake in that culture and how cream was opposed once by the ancient Sumerians so that must be the root. They also seemed very attracted by the 'secret knowledge' idea but in the end these people weren't losing too much weight either.

And the critics looked at all the madness and rightly saw a load of confused, hypocritical and lying fatties who were obviously insane. So they dismissed the whole idea of fitness and weight-loss as a ridiculous fantasy.

[Hassan i Sabbah]

I found Christ here. (http://www.fadetoblack.com/christ/)

[LiquidR]

Originally posted by segovius
Once upon a time people came to the conclusion that 'everything is permitted' and that there were no rules.

One of the effects of this was that people just ate whenever they felt like it. Of course they got fat - some even got obese - but as they were in some ways an advanced society and they knew the truth that there is no right or wrong there seemed no problem with being fat. Things were compounded because various companies and business had a vested interest in keeping people eating (and spending) but on the whole people were happy - unfit and ill a lot, but as happy as they could be under the circumstances.

After a few generations these people accepted things as normal, everything was 'the way it's always been' though of course, they lived shorter lives and were less healthy than they could have been but they had nothing to compare it to so they just called it 'the human condition'.

About this time, a certain person started thinking about this 'human condition' and pondered in particular about their own personal obsession with cream cakes. They wondered what would happen if they stopped eating the five or six cakes a day they were addicted to so they tried to give it up. Strangely they found they couldn't and again, they wondered why this might be and it made them all the more determined to knock these cakes on the head.

After much thought (something that was not exactly fashionable in that time) they concluded that if they convinced themselves that cream cakes were 'evil' then they might be able to give them up and so see what life was like without them. So our thinker went to a doctor and asked him to hypnotise him into believing that cream cakes were noxious, wrong and generally to be avoided.

It didn't work at first so the patient went back to the doctor for a stronger dose - this time the suggestion was implanted that if one eat these cakes then 'something terrible would happen' and lo, this did actually work. The patient was cured of addiction to cream cakes ! Of course he knew that they were not really 'evil' and that there would be no 'punishment' but he allowed himself to believe this to achieve his aim.

He went back to thinking and minus the cakes he found he could think clearer. He also realised that he was getting thinner and thinner and one day he saw he was no longer fat.

He thought a lot about this and soon found he had other capacities - he could run, jump, looked and felt better etc. He started to tell other people about his 'method' - of course they laughed at him. Most viewed him as a freak who was ill and of course, as they were happy enough, they denied his method worked - in fact they denied the existence of the capacities of jumping and running full stop. They claimed that he was 'anti cream cakes' and anti fun. That he made up lies that if you ate a cake terrible things would happen and that his 'system' was just a construct to stop people enjoying themselves everyone knew cream cakes weren't evil - and as this was in fact true, then it seemed to prove itself.

Some people however did listen and did believe you could become thin, fit and healthy. These he taught his method in secret so that the fatties couldn't interfere with the process - they were protesting more and more as his system had implications for the whole food industry.

Some of his students didn't have a problem with cream cakes and he allowed them to eat them - of course they could not eat hamburgers or whatever their particular problem was: sweets, biscuits, pasta, whatever. Some of these students did in fact become thin and athletic but the vast majority couldn't do it and started eating their forbidden foods in secret while preaching the opposite.

After our original thinker died, these students - still massive fatties - taught the system and it became very popular. The only problem was it didn't work. This gave more ammo to the original critics who could point to it and say 'look, it's complete rubbish' and of course in a way it was. The students were just getting fatter and claiming they weren't.

Soon even these students fell out. Each claimed they had the original teaching and that 'God would punish you for eating cream cakes'. Others disagreed and fought them tooth and nail - 'no, no, no God will punish you for eating hamburgers and punish the anti-cream cake crowd the most'.

Of course, ordinary capacities such as jumping and running were claimed to be 'divine' and 'superhuman' gifts which you were bestowed if you were 'holy' enough.

And everyone got fatter still.

Other thinkers occasionally arose - but after such a long time they tended to focus on finding links and antecedents between this type of cake in that culture and how cream was opposed once by the ancient Sumerians so that must be the root. They also seemed very attracted by the 'secret knowledge' idea but in the end these people weren't losing too much weight either.

And the critics looked at all the madness and rightly saw a load of confused, hypocritical and lying fatties who were obviously insane. So they dismissed the whole idea of fitness and weight-loss as a ridiculous fantasy.

Hmm, diet craze vs religion. Interesting and funny analogy. But it doesn't address the afterlife, that is where most religions promise the real reward for a virtuous life, not the here and now.

[segovius]

Originally posted by LiquidR
Hmm, diet craze vs religion. Interesting and funny analogy. But it doesn't address the afterlife, that is where most religions promise the real reward for a virtuous life, not the here and now.

That's because no-one can ever possibly know about an afterlife, its nature or whether there is one or not. There may be. There may not. We cannot ever know. No-one ever has.

But this was the great discovery of the anti-cream cake lobby (well it seemed great to them as they were at a low-level of intelligence, it's really quite basic) - to postpone punishment for cake eating to a time and place where the punishment was not subject to verification.

If they had said 'next Tuesday' or 'in 10 years time', their control system would have fallen apart when no such punishment occurred and everyone would start eating cream cakes again and by now, these were firmly established as 'evil' (although the leaders of this sect often stuffed their faces with them in private).

After a while further refinements were added - the nature of the punishments for example were embroidered in ever more sadistic detail. This had the extra advantage of postulating a 'get out of jail' ticket whereby such punishments could be avoided - always, of course to the benefit of the cream-cake suppressors and at great cost and misery to for everyone else.

[johnq]

Originally posted by MarcUK
damn you are scary!,

just before I started this thread I was just staring at an image, but had no idea what it was, when I googled Kabbalistic tree of life - up it popped again, and I was just this very minute trying to find a connection between tarot cards/numbers of letters in an ancient alphabet and the number 36.

Two great sites for ancient writing/scripts/alphabets...

http://www.omniglot.com/
http://www.ancientscripts.com/

[Ria]

hey every 1 im new to dis site and i was reading the bible this morning and went to revelations 13 vs 17- 18 which talks about 666 which then lead me to go and get understanding so as i did i found this web site which helped me understand what the writer was letting us know in that part of the bible i can tell u how u can find it go too google.co uk den type in what does 666 mean den scroll down to the 7th one and it should say 666, what does it mean? and i hope dat helps u as it helped me please let me know wot u thought thanks

[tonton]

Um... you don't have to pretend to type like an idiot to hide your style so that you can have an online alter-ego.