Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 3
Eddy_P

The Book with Seven Seals - FOUND

258 posts in this topic

It's something we have tried to tell him a few times already, "you can't just use a concordance to translate a text", but we were and apparently still are wrong.

Another thing I do start to find rather funny is that for someone who tells us not to rely on opinions or preconceptions, he does spend a awfull lot of time telling us he didn't come up with the discovery and the CD's, but Ronald Pegg did. I still think that he and Pegg are one and the same person at this point.

LOL - no the best thing so far, is "dont question the facts or the research, make up your own mind" attitude and repeated saying of Mr Pegg lol.

Ok so with out questioning anything my minds made up..... its still rubbish,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

LOL - no the best thing so far, is "dont question the facts or the research, make up your own mind" attitude and repeated saying of Mr Pegg lol.

Ok so with out questioning anything my minds made up..... its still rubbish,

Isn't "dont question the facts or the research, make up your own mind" a contradiction anyway? Just wondering.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You are 100% correct unless you a sheep and dont question but just follow.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You do not know that for sure. As you pointed out, the text states that the ancient writer said “like” not that it ‘was’.

A young black female Bos Primigenius calf without formed horns does look “like” the she-wolf icon from the Ancients cd-rom.

REV13_2.JPG

aurochc.jpg

Point 1. The ‘wolf’ you show does not look anything like the ‘She-wolf’ icon from the Ancients cd-rom (pictured above).

(You are comparing ‘apples’ with ‘oranges’.)

A young black female Bos Primigenius calf without formed horns does look “like” the she-wolf icon from the Ancients cd-rom.

Point 2. You have already acknowledged that I have explained this. It is just that you do not like my explanation. My explanation compared a young auroch calf (pictured above)

The rather obvious multiple teats ought to be the giveaway. Unlike canines, bovines only have four, all prominently situated on a single udder. The only large animals with a similar arrangement to dogs are pigs, which the Isrealites obviously had little to do with. One would think anyone in a culture where animal husbandry was the rule rather than the exception would recognize the distinction.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've seen hundreds of people who can quote the Bible, chapter and verse, who had something to proove and few, if any, of them were able to convince me that their Fringy idea was correct based on their cherry picked quotes.

Having great knowledge of scripture was one of Jesus's ways of knowing who his enemies were. They were either crazed demon possessed people, or they were the law enforcing pharisees.

I think the wolf is obviously a wolf and not a calf. Just my opinion. If this was a Poll, I think it would swing 99% in favor of Wolf.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Chapters and verses in the Bible are a modern addition.

“The original manuscripts did not contain the chapter and verse divisions in the numbered form familiar to modern readers.” Source:

http://en.wikipedia....es_of_the_Bible

Punctuation was added along with the chapters and verses.

Chapters:

Archbishop Stephen Langton and Cardinal Hugo de Sancto Caro developed different schemas for systematic division of the Bible in the early 13th century. It is the system of Archbishop Langton on which the modern chapter divisions are based.

Verses:

The first person to divide New Testament chapters into verses was Italian Dominican biblical scholar Santi Pagnini (1470–1541), but his system was never widely adopted. Robert Estienne created an alternate numbering in his 1551 edition of the Greek New Testament which was also used in his 1553 publication of the Bible in French. Estienne's system of division was widely adopted, and it is this system which is found in almost all modern bibles.

You say that

The semi-colon was added when the chapters and verses were arranged. This is why they appear where they do in the links you gave. Generally scholars and laypersons believe the chapters, verses, and punctuation to be original. They are not.

As the semi-colon was not an original Greek sentence mark, your claim that it ‘joins’ the two sections is misguided and unfounded.

The other source I found was for informational value for anyone who would like to see the Greek, English translation and Greek variants on one site. The source I used was the Codex Sinaiticus.

As I can not read Greek, I can not put the text in the proper structure and must rely on English translations for that. Fortunately Everdred supplied what was necessary to show that your view is incorrect.

’Tithing’ is the religious concept named and described in the Bible.

Ronald Pegg found it was used by the time travelers to encode the military and other numbers in the Bible told to ancient people in over the 1,000 format.

That part of Pegg’s work has not yet been released, so no, the evidence is not yet available to you.

Tithe per the wikipedia

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tithe

A tithe (pron.: /ˈtð/; from Old English: teogoþa "tenth") is a one-tenth part of something, paid as a contribution to a religious organization or compulsory tax to government.

For Mr Pegg to have discovered it was used by time travelers there must first be evidence of time travelers. Such evidence is at this point non-existant. I'm willing to state that the supposed evidence that is not avilable, never will be.

It appears to me as if you are using circular reasoning. You are using unevidenced time travelers as evidence that information on cd's ended up in the Bible which is evidence for the existence of time travelers.

Incorrect comments. John says…

Rev 1:1-2 "...he sent...his angel unto his servant John: Who bare record...of all things that he saw"

Rev 1:19 "Write the things which thou hast seen..."

Rev 5:1 "I saw in the right hand side...a book written within and on the backside, sealed with 7 seals..."

Rev 10:8 "...Go take the little book which is open in the hand of the angel..."

Haven’t you examined the extractions from the Book of Revelation and conducted the TEST from the OP ?

In his first hand personal account, a historical person named John, on Patmos Island in 95 CE relates how an Angel showed him visions and told him to write it all down. Those 'visions' came from a special book being held by the Angel, sealed with Seven Seals.

59 descriptions of that ‘Book’ and its contents (from Revelation 4:6-7, 5:1, 5:5,6, 6:1-8, 7:2, 7:4 and 11:1, 13:1-2,11, 21:2,10,12,15) have been matched to the Ancients cd-rom and its contents (at a match percentage of over 90).

This seems to very much support Ronald Pegg’s claim.

1:1 The revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave to him, to show to his servants things that must shortly take place, and having sent by his angel he made it known to his servant John,

2 who became a witness to the word of God and the testimony of Jesus Christ, whatever things he saw.

19 Write therefore the things that thou sawest, and the things that are, and those that shall be after these,

4:10 the twenty-four elders fall before him that sits upon the throne, and worship him that live, from age to age, and throw their crowns before the throne, saying:

11 Worthy art thou, our Lord and God, to receive glory and honor and power, for thou didst create all things, and because of thy will they existed and were created.

5:1 And I saw in the right hand of him that sat on the throne a book written within and on the back, sealed with seven seals.

10:8 And the voice that I heard from heaven again spoke to me and said: Go, take the little book that is opened in the hand of the angel that stands on the sea and on the earth.

9 And I went to the angel, saying to him that he should give me the little book. And he said to me: Take it and eat it up, and it will make thy belly bitter, but in thy mouth it shall be sweet as honey.

10 And I took the little book out of the hand of the angel and ate it up; and it was in my mouth as honey, sweet; and when I had eaten it, my belly was bitter.

it is true that John is told to write what he sees per verse 1:19.

As can be seen in the verses, there are two books not just one. The book with 7 seals is in the hand of the one sitting on the throne who is identified in the previous verses as God. The angel has the little book that is opened in his hand. It is clear that John does not get access to the book with 7 seals so could not write about anything within it and it refutes that part of your theory that claims the book with 7 seals was a cd-rom.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll just quickly explain the Revelations 7:4 translation. Here's the Greek text:

καὶ ἤκουσα τὸν ἀριθμὸν τῶν ἐσφραγισμένων, ἑκατὸν τεσσεράκοντα τέσσαρες χιλιάδες, ἐσφραγισμένοι ἐκ πάσης φυλῆς υἱῶν Ἰσραήλ

Ancient Greek is an inflected language, and as part of this inflection all nouns, pronouns, and adjectives (including participles, which are adjectives formed from a verbal stem) have endings that change to reflect differences of gender, number, and case (= how the word functions in the sentence).

So the discussion here is centered on "τῶν ἐσφραγισμένων", which is generally translated "of the sealed." But what does that mean, exactly? Let's examine it more closely. First of all, "ἐσφραγισμένων" isn't a noun, but rather an adjective. More specifically, it has a verbal root ("sphragis" meaning "to seal"), and we can see from the leading epsilon that it is denoting past time, while the -men- infix denotes that it's a passive participle, which together make it a perfect passive participle, which as mentioned previously is a verbal adjective. But we see in front of it "τῶν", the definite article ("the"), which means that this adjective is being used as a substantive (meaning it functions as a noun because the noun is implied and does not need to be stated). We know that "τῶν" goes with "ἐσφραγισμένων" both because of position and because their endings are the same, -ων. This ending denotes a genitive case and plural number--indicating that it is referring to multiple people as the implied noun.

This all gives us a literal translation of that two word phrase as "of those who were sealed", and with the "τὸν ἀριθμὸν" (which is an accusative singular, meaning it's a direct object) we get "the number of those (people) who were sealed."

And as to the confusion for the KJV translation, look at the Greek once again:

καὶ ἤκουσα τὸν ἀριθμὸν τῶν ἐσφραγισμένων, ἑκατὸν τεσσεράκοντα τέσσαρες χιλιάδες, ἐσφραγισμένοι ἐκ πάσης φυλῆς υἱῶν Ἰσραήλ

So "esphagismenon" ("of those who were sealed"), 144000, "esphagismenoi" (-oi is the nominative plural masculine form, which confirms that we are talking about multiple people being sealed). This is why the KJV has "and there were sealed"--the word for "sealed" is used twice, and the editors of the KJV didn't read it with a punctuation between the number and "esphagismenoi", so they're literally just reading "144,000 (people) were sealed".

And this should serve as a practical warning that you can't just use a concordance to translate a text--you need to understand all of the underlying grammar of the language to properly put the words together.

Thanks for this info. I am going to keep a link to it for future reference.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The rather obvious multiple teats ought to be the giveaway. Unlike canines, bovines only have four, all prominently situated on a single udder. The only large animals with a similar arrangement to dogs are pigs, which the Isrealites obviously had little to do with. One would think anyone in a culture where animal husbandry was the rule rather than the exception would recognize the distinction.

I've seen hundreds of people who can quote the Bible, chapter and verse, who had something to proove and few, if any, of them were able to convince me that their Fringy idea was correct based on their cherry picked quotes.

Having great knowledge of scripture was one of Jesus's ways of knowing who his enemies were. They were either crazed demon possessed people, or they were the law enforcing pharisees.

I think the wolf is obviously a wolf and not a calf. Just my opinion. If this was a Poll, I think it would swing 99% in favor of Wolf.

That's the point I have been trying to make. There is no way in hell they could not have made the difference between a calf and a wolf. The image from the CD is clearly a wolf. And yes the quotes are cherry picked to suit the CD which in this case proves nothing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's the point I have been trying to make. There is no way in hell they could not have made the difference between a calf and a wolf. The image from the CD is clearly a wolf. And yes the quotes are cherry picked to suit the CD which in this case proves nothing.

Could probably cherry pick examples from the Koran, or the Rig Veda, and find as many connections. Probably you could cross reference any three scripts of The Big Bang Theory and get as many hits of correlation between that and the Bible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

it's a mysteriously time traveling 1990s Pentium 286 with a copy of Encarta on it that primitve man despite Enligh not existing fo 1000 years, no power, an interface that is godawful even for the 1990s and **** al evidence it's proof that there is no god, Jesus was a fraud and every discovery ever made was the result of a CD made in the 90s.

Ahh! Now I understand!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the wolf is obviously a wolf and not a calf. Just my opinion. If this was a Poll, I think it would swing 99% in favor of Wolf.
OK, so you disagree with 1 out of the over 200 extracted descriptions matched to the contents of the Ancients cd-rom.

You may not have noticed that on the on-line evaluation TEST page, I have given it a preselected ‘maybe’ and not a ‘yes’.

So you may be surprised to learn that while I support Mr Pegg’s explanation, I personally only give it 50%

We have, after all, been talking about Mr Pegg’s explanation.

As far as a poll goes, the stats are speaking for themselves.

So far from 18 people, the average is 95.41 percent match of descriptions/contents to the Ancients cd-rom

72.63

92.18

93.30

95.81

96.37

97.21

97.49

My personal score is the second to lowest one shown, 92.18

Therefore other people are being more generous with their ‘opinions’ than myself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
And yes the quotes are cherry picked to suit the CD which in this case proves nothing.
No.

From the link in the OP, three biblical writers who document an encounter with an ‘angel’ relate what they were shown (and told).

Ezekiel does this in 101 often sequential verses.

Daniel does this in 69 often sequential verses.

John does this in 59 often sequential verses.

220 (combined, excluding double ups) extractions regarding the ‘book’ held by the ‘angel’ with the three writers’ personal descriptions of what they saw from it, is not cherry picking.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OK, so you disagree with 1 out of the over 200 extracted descriptions matched to the contents of the Ancients cd-rom.

You may not have noticed that on the on-line evaluation TEST page, I have given it a preselected ‘maybe’ and not a ‘yes’.

So you may be surprised to learn that while I support Mr Pegg’s explanation, I personally only give it 50%

We have, after all, been talking about Mr Pegg’s explanation.

That is just the one that is being currently covered in this thread. I am sure that if we looked at the other 199, we'd find 1/3 or 1/2 are just as contrived. I am really sorry that I don't have time to go over every single one. So, all I have time for is to reference the ones I've seen/read on this thread.

As far as a poll goes, the stats are speaking for themselves.

So far from 18 people, the average is 95.41 percent match of descriptions/contents to the Ancients cd-rom

72.63

92.18

93.30

95.81

96.37

97.21

97.49

My personal score is the second to lowest one shown, 92.18

Therefore other people are being more generous with their ‘opinions’ than myself.

That is not an objective poll. It is a poll of likely believers who Want to read what is on the site. Look at your "Visitor" count of how many people have visited and compare to how many took the test. That is a better number to use to evaluate whether people believe or not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

thank you kmt for closing the other thread :D

one down.. one to go

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

LOL - eddy you are so stubbon.

I bet if I picked up a fishing book (fishing is my sport) I could make connections to the bible, a TV show and real life experinces.

Then I could put a question air together to reflect those connections with ease.

All Im saying is that your self test on YOUR site is biased and set up to reflect the results you want it too.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OK, so you disagree with 1 out of the over 200 extracted descriptions matched to the contents of the Ancients cd-rom.

You may not have noticed that on the on-line evaluation TEST page, I have given it a preselected ‘maybe’ and not a ‘yes’.

So you may be surprised to learn that while I support Mr Pegg’s explanation, I personally only give it 50%

We have, after all, been talking about Mr Pegg’s explanation.

As far as a poll goes, the stats are speaking for themselves.

So far from 18 people, the average is 95.41 percent match of descriptions/contents to the Ancients cd-rom

72.63

92.18

93.30

95.81

96.37

97.21

97.49

My personal score is the second to lowest one shown, 92.18

Therefore other people are being more generous with their ‘opinions’ than myself.

Eddy, shouldn't that be more than 18? Well, at least one more, considering I did take your test, and btw. I want my time back please. The fact that in all this time only 18 people have taken your "test", should tell you something. Your little idea (I refuse to even dignify this with the appellation theory) needs to much twisting of facts and only works with assumptions. That's not research, that's not facts.

No.

From the link in the OP, three biblical writers who document an encounter with an ‘angel’ relate what they were shown (and told).

Ezekiel does this in 101 often sequential verses.

Daniel does this in 69 often sequential verses.

John does this in 59 often sequential verses.

220 (combined, excluding double ups) extractions regarding the ‘book’ held by the ‘angel’ with the three writers’ personal descriptions of what they saw from it, is not cherry picking.

No. Even in your tests you cherry picks quotes and construct questions around it. That's cherry picking pure and simple.

[/left]

That is just the one that is being currently covered in this thread. I am sure that if we looked at the other 199, we'd find 1/3 or 1/2 are just as contrived. I am really sorry that I don't have time to go over every single one. So, all I have time for is to reference the ones I've seen/read on this thread.

That is not an objective poll. It is a poll of likely believers who Want to read what is on the site. Look at your "Visitor" count of how many people have visited and compare to how many took the test. That is a better number to use to evaluate whether people believe or not.

You'll find that it is rather 2/3 that you'll find to be as contrived.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think Eddy should take all of us that are "sceptical" to say the least, give us all 0 on his ranking system and re-work his average and he will find that it far lower that 50%.

That in itself should say something. Its easy to lead a person by distorting facts and creating half truths out of selective material, its marketing 101.

But the FACTS cant be ignored here, and that is that this whole thing is to make Eddy some money on the side, so he is doing what he believes to be a fine job of premoting his work.

Eddy should become a door to door sales man, if he puts this much time into this rubbish think what he could do in someting constructive.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I found a book under my bed and it was called The Book of Seven Seals......

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You'll find that it is rather 2/3 that you'll find to be as contrived.

I was being generous. :innocent: Benefit of the Doubt and all that, since I haven't even looked at his 200 points of "Evidence".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OK, fair enough, generosity is not a bad trait to have after all. ;-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

lol found a book no one has ever heard of claim importance then make you pay to see its existence

seems legit.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

lol found a book no one has ever heard of claim importance then make you pay to see its existence

seems legit.

In fact it's not even a book as such, it's about a CD rom used by time travellers, to show the prophets, so they could write the old testament. Well that's more or less it in a nutshell, according to Eddy_P anyway.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well I think we can safely say.. case closed..

how about we let this thread die the ignoble death it deserves..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well I think we can safely say.. case closed..

how about we let this thread die the ignoble death it deserves..

We could ask Kmt to close it I suppose, otherwise it will come back at some point or another and we start all over again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We could ask Kmt to close it I suppose, otherwise it will come back at some point or another and we start all over again.

true.. but then KMT might be nice and close it when it appears again.. which it is bound to do..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 3

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.