Windows 3 described in the Bible

A follow up answer to questions generated by Edward's wheel/DVD post An extraction from Ronald Pegg's Discoveries. Used with permission.The Windows 3 operating system's File Manager Screen is {relatively} clearly stated in a sequence of original Hebrew words of 1Kings 7:4-5 but the added English words and amended sentence structure hide the message in "And {there were} windows {in} three rows, and light {was} against light {in} three ranks. And all the doors and posts {were} square, with the windows: and light {was} against light {in} three ranks."Removing the added words (*as found in the KJV Bible) gives; "Windows three. Rows light. Against light three ranks. All the doors and posts square. With the windows light against light, three ranks".In Strong's Concordance Word 4237 "light" means 'window' but comes from Word 2372 which specifically means 'to have a vision of' as in 'to perceive'. Therefore Etymology of the word "light" conveys the feel that there is some type of vision in a window.This reads as; "Windows 3. Rows perceived. Against three perceived ranks. All the doors and posts; square within the perceived windows. Against three perceived ranks.This is saying that "Windows 3 (the operating system). Rows seen (the rows of windows in the File Manager). All the doors and posts (the scroll bars and borders) within the windows are square".
Why are we told twice "Against three perceived ranks" ?
We are being told that these words are encoded, therefore we need to recheck the Etymology.
Word 7969 "three" as an ordinal number means 'third'. Word 6471 "rank" means 'to stroke' but comes from word 6470 which means 'to tap'.So "Against three perceived ranks" = 'against the third perceived to tap' and because the English translation has rearranged the original word sequence, this gives "to tap against the third perceived {window}".So does the Windows 3- File Manager's screen have three square windows, and do we stroke (click the mouse) in the third window ?Yes. To run the Ancients CD-Rom we need to click on the appropriate highlighted in the third window - the one containing the programme.exe file.

In my opinion, finding descriptions of the Ancients cd-rom in ancient texts from all around the world, and depictions of the images from it in various ancient artworks as Mr Pegg has done, shows that particular ancient people viewed the content of the Ancients cd-rom.
Time Travel is Mr Pegg's conclusion. I can not think of another explanation at this point of time.
Did an old 386 computer get taken back in time, or did the ancient person get brought forward in time ?
Or was a holographic projection of a computer and its images sent back ?
Did the time travellers visit the mid 1990s and collect a new PC 386 plus the disks ?I personally do not know the answers to these questions.
But Mr Pegg's work shows that specific people at specific times describe a computer system (oracle), as if they personally sat at a table (altar of god?) and used the mouse (staff) to make the 'cup of knowledge' (cd-rom) give forth its knowledge on the magic mirror (monitor) while being attended by a messenger (time traveller) in a bright light.
Other texts describe in detail the parts of a computer (temple pieces) that were stolen from the Jerusalem Temple.
The 'end time' history that has been provided by the messenger (time traveller) to ancient people that has been written up as stories, has been found to describe several events including the disclosure of the E.L.S. Bible code between 1958 and 1997 by Dr Eliyahu Rips and Michael Drosnin (Elijah and Michael), plus a description of the 1990/1991 Persian Gulf War (cf. Daniel 11 and Revelations 9).Remove the mistranslations and religious interpretations from ancient texts and use the original word meanings, and modern historical events and modern objects are being described.
Is this evidence of time travel - and the source of ancient myths, legends, and religions ?
I believe so. They have a time machine at their disposal - maybe they didn't visit a museum but went back to the mid 1990s and obtained a new PC 386 ! ?I personally agree with the logic of some of your comments, and point out that I was presenting Mr Pegg's conclusions from the evidence that he has discovered. So it is probably now relevant to briefly present an overview of his findings so that you can evaluate his evidence for yourselves. (An answer to a previous question, and a new introduction to the PPHC Study Group's web site also preambles this topic.)The individual word by word decodings of the following verses may be found in the Members Area of the PPHC Study Group web site.
Hebrew descriptions:
Along with the two Tables of Testimony (cf. the ancient wheels) and associated with the Ark of the Covenant (box of compacts) were dishes with a cover and bowls, an Ark of Testimony, a Table, a Tabernacle, and a Mercy Seat.
In Exodus 35:11-13 we are further told of the tabernacle of the Oracle apparatus plus its attributes.Exodus 35:11 decodes as "The conspicuous covering of the residence. Something belayed is to fill in the hollow and be held firmly in position on the protrusion from the tabernacle that splits off then flees suddenly".
The "protrusion from the tabernacle" = the CD-Rom Drive Tray (mercy seat) that protrudes from a computer and then "flees suddenly" once a compact disk is placed "firmly in position in the hollow".Exodus 35:12-13 decodes as "From the sockets at the foundation of the controller box; a separation - the Mercy Seat lid and the sacred screen; joined together - a spread out table and a staff utensil".
This describes a computer system - The "staff utensil" (a computer's mouse) and the "spread out table" (the keyboard) are joined to the "controller box" (CPU box) via "sockets" at its base, as is the "sacred screen" (monitor).Exodus 38:7-8 tells us attributes of the Mercy Seat and Looking Glass, and reveals that; the Mercy Seat altar is a yellowish* round excavated platform for a glistening polished plate. (ie. the protruding CD-Rom Tray in which the disk sits.); and that the looking-glass mirror has a brass* coloured stand. (ie. the monitor's stand is a yellowish* shade.) This is the colour of the plastic generally used for computers in the early 1990s, and is from where Mr Pegg begins to formulate his conclusion that a PC 386 was seen and described.The ancient Hebrew people have faithfully described the pieces of the apparatus through which they consulted the Oracle in their Jerusalem Temple, but due to the Old English religious translations not always using the original meanings of the Hebrew words, the description of a computer system has not been recognized - until now.- The Temple of the Lord is the CPU (computer box) in a Tower Case.
- The Mercy Seat refers to the CD-Drive Tray upon which you place the offering (compact disk) at the top of the - Tower.
- The Sacred Screen (ark of testimony) is the Monitor on its Stand. (= The Looking Glass/magic mirror)
- The Spread out Table is the Keyboard.
- The Sacred Rod (Staff of Moses) is the Mouse and its Cable.
- The Plates are the clear Plastic containers that hold the compact disks.
- The Two Stone Tables are two specifically documented and described compact disks.
- The Ark of the Covenant is a wooden box that held the compact disks.
- The Horns refer to the stereo Speakers.The decoding of 2 Kings 25:17 reveals a data transfer rate of 8 bit - again, mid 1990s level of technology.In a previous post, 1Kings 7:4-5 describes the Windows 3 File Manager window, and John recounts the date and size of the data file that runs the Ancients cd-rom in Revelations 7:4-8.
Windows 3 was a mid 1990s operating system.The Plates of Mormon:
In the (Mormon) Book of Ether (1:2 and 3:1) of 100BC, the number of floppy disks and compact disks required to set up and boot up a specific computer system is reported, and is confirmed in Numbers 7:88.
From a total of 24 ‘plates’, there are 8 vessels, and 16 small stones. (8 + 16 = 24)
The "vessels" are described differently to the small "stones" (therefore they are larger).
As previously discovered, these vessels are exactly described in Numbers 7:84-85 as colourless square breast-plates that contain 120mm compact disks.
"Small" stone plates = floppy discs: "Large" plates (vessels) = CD-Roms.Thus the ancient people of Limhi found 16 floppy discs and 8 CD-Roms in a "box" (ark) that was originally used for the computer (Oracle) in Jerusalem (at the temple of the Lord).Does it take 16 floppy discs to load the software for a 386 VGA computer with a double-speed CD-Rom Drive and a Sound Card to run the three mentioned CD-Roms?
Yes !Using etymology, the literal decoding of Numbers 7:88 reads as "A number of the herd that are offered up have a locking metal protector. 24 are divided into a force of 16. These 16 to prepare. The thick end of an unrecognizable different group of 16 very thin raising devices, packed full that teaches the fundamentals of knowledge with information, begin to build for a sacred purpose and to show and give signs".In summary, here are some of the pieces of evidence that led Mr Pegg to the PC 386 conclusion
Individual pieces of a computer are described in Hebrew texts, and are of a yellowish colour. 8 bit technology. Windows 3 operating system. 1995 cd-rom needs a PC 386 as a minimum. Mormon historical records mention the number of floppy disks required to set up MS-Dos 6 and Windows 3 on a PC 386. A Mormon historical picture shows a witness holding a clear plastic cd-rom case.Many attributes of a mid 1990s PC 386 are described and documented in ancient texts - therefore my conclusion is that a PC 386 computer system is being described.
Unfortunately, this does not clarify whether a PC 386 was sent back in time, or the ancient 'prophet' himself came forward in time. I do not personally know. To alert people to the fact that time travel encounters have influenced the formation of the world's religions.
Many attempts were made to correct the formation of religions due to the previous chronological encounter with a time traveller, but due to modern technology overwhelming ancient people, it only compounded the situation.
The attempt to place a letter skip code that contained modern historical data in the Bible also failed to alert modern (mid to late 20th century) scholars to the realization that the Bible is not what it seems.
The attempt in the mid 1500s in France to conceal modern history in the works of Nostradamus also failed to bring about an early warning.I believe that the reason for all these failures pertains to the fact that the technology being used to hide or conceal modern information in ancient texts was not understood either by the ancient person in the first place and secondly by the modern person 'decoding' these strange texts - and/or by both due to the religious perceptions covering over this 'encoded' information.
Another relevant point is that even if the exact modern events were written in a sentence by the modern decoders, they would not have found a corresponding historical match until after the event had actually occurred. This is why the 'end time' stories have remained a mystery for so long - the events had not yet occurred.Then came along Ronald Pegg using a PC 386 computer himself after the 'encoded' historical events had occurred and the Ancients cd-rom was produced. Not knowing Hebrew or Greek, he read the Old English KJV Bible and used Strong's Concordance and an Australian dictionary to find out what the old words actually meant.
He noted that religious scholars are waiting for someone called Michael preceded by Elijah to "unseal" an 'end time' book, that specific imagery plus historical and astronomical events (signs) have been carefully described by ancient 'prophets' who were visited by "an angel", and that many of the people, places, and 'history' related in ancient texts have not been corroborated by any other historical records of similar times.So you can imagine Mr Pegg's surprise on July 22 1998 when he viewed the Ancients cd-rom, and there, in the middle of the screen, above the glassy sea, were four icons - a lion, a face of a man, an ox, and something like eagle's wings - just as John and Ezekiel from the Bible describe.
He then read about the 'end time war' in the Bible (cf. Daniel 11 and Revelations 9), and referring to several books about the 1991 Persian Gulf War, found that the information exactly matched.
The elusive 'exodus' that is not documented in any other ancient texts except in the Bible is an exact description of the April 1991 exodus by Iraqi Kurds into the Turkish mountains.The important point here, is that not only did Mr Pegg know what a PC 386 computer was and knew how to use a cd-rom, but the historical events by 1998 had already occurred - so when he read the Bible using the original meanings and not the given religious rhetoric, he simply found the corresponding data in contemporary history books.It is possible that the descriptions of a PC 386 computer running Windows 3 were deliberately placed in the ancient texts by future people, knowing that unlike all the previous attempts where the contrast in technology and understanding was great and led to misunderstandings, Mr Pegg would be aware of the technology and recognize what was being described.This is what I think, based upon the available evidence, and may answer your questions of why an old (to us in 2004) PC 386 and Windows 3 is described in the Bible.

(Extracted from the PPHC Study Group web site with permission)
That's 24 discs all together. Thus in this specific computer package we have the "computer" itself, 16 "floppy discs", and 8 "compact discs", and they are;
# _ Floppy Disks
4 _ MS-DOS 6.21, 1993
1 _ Intel Processor Utilities, 1992
1 _ Graphics Disc
1 _ Sound Blaster, 1994
1 _ Video Blaster SE, 1993
8 _ MS_WINDOWS 3.11 for WorkGroups, 1993
--
16For the 8 cd-roms, please read the "386 MS-Dos Computer" link on the "Pegg's Conclusion" page from the SEMINARS menu item in the Member Area of the web site http://www.pphcstudygroup.org.au

I say that although the Greeks wrote their own versions of religious texts in their own language and understanding, John in referring to the "book" in Revelations that is being described by the Greek word 'biblion', is actually referring to the "sealed book" mentioned by Daniel, and because of the "in the Hebrew tongue" hint cited twice in the New Testament, and because we know that the Greeks employed 'secret methods' of writing, we have to focus on the original Hebrew meanings and contexts of this "book" - the "end time book" mentioned in the Bible.If you want me to say that the surface text meaning of the general Greek word "book" doesn't have 'roundness', then no it doesn't in the Greek context of the word 'biblion'. But John WAS in a Roman jail, and would have probably been aware of Latin words such as 'rota' (wheel).
I have stated my case several times. It is you who wishes to remove the English and Latin associations.
If you chose not to understand Mr Pegg's methods, that is fine.
We must agree to disagree on this one, and move on - or we will be repeating ourselves and missing the opportunity to examine the many other important discoveries made by Mr Pegg. Er..please re-read the 13 paragraphs in my previous post that ends with :
"In summary, here are some of the pieces of evidence that led Mr Pegg to the PC 386 conclusion
Individual pieces of a computer are described in Hebrew texts, and are of a yellowish colour. 8 bit technology. Windows 3 operating system. 1995 cd-rom needs a PC 386 as a minimum. Mormon historical records mention the number of floppy disks required to set up MS-Dos 6 and Windows 3 on a PC 386. A Mormon historical picture shows a witness holding a clear plastic cd-rom case.
Thesemany attributes of a mid 1990s PC 386 are described and documented in ancient texts"; I am not in a position to guess or speculate at the reasons why time travellers may have utilized a particular piece of technology. I personally do not know the answer to this.
I hope questions like this may eventually be answered when a more extensive examination of Mr Pegg's evidence and methods are conducted. At the moment, I can only examine the evidence so far presented - and either agree or disagree with his conclusions. Many ancient texts describe certain similar imagery and sequences of images, both in the plain text and also when using the Hebrew and Greek origins. Genesis 1:1-6 is a good example.
Available from the new introduction of the PPHC-SG web site http://www.pphcstudygroup.org.au is a downloadable pdf file that contains a summary of this imagery from many of the world's Creation Myths.
Then in the Member Area, the "Ancients CD-Rom Overview" and "Examine Specific Claims" sections of the STUDY OPTIONS menu item shows you the visual evidence - when ancient descriptions are viewed as you read the sequence of images described in ancient texts (from the .pdf pages). Using the Hebrew etymology and original primary root meanings as cited in Strong's Concordance and not the given English words found in modern Bibles.
(Extracted from the PPHC-SG web site with permission):H-word 4908 "tabernacle" means 'a residence' (as in the Temple).
168 "tent" means 'a covering' as clearly conspicuous from a distance. ie 'a conspicuous covering'.
4372 "covering" comes from word 3680 which means 'to plump' as in to fill in the hollow.
7165 "taches" means 'a belaying pin' but comes from word 7164 which means 'to protrude'.
The Old English word for "belaying" lecgan comes from two words 'be-lay'. "Pin" means 'to hold firmly in one position'. So using the Old English and Hebrew etymologies, "taches" refers to 'something that is belayed and is held firmly in one position on a protrusion'.
7175 "boards" is from an unused root that means 'to split off'.
1280 "bars" comes from word 1272 which means 'to flee suddenly'.
5982 "pillars" means 'a standing column'.This gives; The conspicuous covering of the residence. Something belayed is to fill in the hollow and be held firmly in position on the protrusion from the tabernacle that splits off then flees suddenly."The protrusion from the tabernacle" refers to the CD-Rom Drive Tray that protrudes from a computer and then "flees suddenly" once a compact disk is placed "firmly in position in the hollow".134 "sockets" means 'a basis of a building' but comes from the same as word 113 which means 'controller', and is given the meanings of 'foundation' and 'sockets'. This derives 'the sockets at the foundation of the controller building'.
727 "ark" means 'a box'.
905 "staves" means 'a separation'.
3727 "Mercy Seat" means 'a lid'.
6532 "vail" means 'the sacred screen'.
4539 "covering" comes from word 5526 which means 'to entwine' or to join together.
7979 "table" means 'a spread out table'.
905 "staves' means a staff or rod.
3627 "vessels" means 'an apparatus, a utensil'.This gives; From the sockets at the foundation of the controller box; a separation - the Mercy Seat lid and the sacred screen; joined together - a spread out table and a staff utensil.The "staff utensil" (a computer's mouse) and the "spread out table" (the keyboard) are joined to the "controller box" (CPU box) via "sockets" at its base, as is the "sacred screen" (monitor).Note: Mr Pegg comments that he was amazed that so many of the English words in the Bible did NOT reflect the original Hebrew root and etymological meanings and contexts. Exodus 38:7-8 tells us attributes of the Mercy Seat and Looking Glass.H-word 3871 "boards" means 'a glistening, polished or plate'.
3595 "laver" means 'something round as excavated'; a platform.
"Brass" is a yellowish colour.
This means that the Mercy Seat altar is a yellowish excavated round platform for a glistening polished plate. ie. the protruding CD-Rom TrayH-word 3653 "foot" means 'a stand'.
4759 "looking glasses" means 'a vision' and also 'a mirror'.
This means the looking-glass mirror has a brass coloured stand. ie. the monitor's stand is a yellowish shade, being the colour of the plastic generally used for computers in the early 1990s. I checked with a local computer technician who confirmed to me that early 1990s 386/486 ran 8 bit, Pentiums ran 16 bit. - I can't remember what he told me next ran 32 then 64 bit - sorry.You will find a copy of Mr Pegg's explanation for this decoding in his Research Booklet #7, The Matter as Spoken", page 938, which is available by downloading it from the PPHC-SG web site in "Download PDF Booklets" from the LINKS menu item in the Member Area.Here briefly is his explanation of the decoding of 2Kings 25:17. ie. "The first standing column to rise 8 to 10. A means of access to the main part of the system is set upon the base. The level of attainment is set at 3 units (of measurement)".This means "2 (the base) to the power (the unit of measurement) of 3" and gives 2^3 (or 2x 2x 2) which derives the number 8. But in base eight there is no digit "8".
The number 8 is represented by the digit combination 10. Thus the unit column raises to the next one for the number 8 in base 8 to the digits 10.
Exactly what the encoded message states. You will find Mr Pegg's full translation of Numbers 7:88 on page 944 of his research Booklet #7, The Matter as Spoken".
He ends by saying, quote- "While not grammatically fluent the "feel" from the etymology has just described 16 thin floppy discs (unrecognizable thing) with a metal locking protector (sliding metal protector) as a specific 'force' from a larger group of 24 that are inserted (offered up)."-end quoteOut of all the words from this verse, I am having trouble following three of his 'decodings' (unless you allow his use of the English dictionary meanings in reference to derived words), but have confirmed his 'decoding' of the word "sixty" as 16 by referring to the special notes in the Concordance.This is how I see it from those notes: H-word 8346 "sixty" is a multiple of H-word 8337 meaning 'six' which itself can be in connection with the principal word to which it is attached (in this case 'six') and rendered in English as one word, given as "sixteen" which means that two Hebrew words are translated into one. ie. 6 + 10 (with 10 being the number of fingers from 8337).Mr Pegg's explanation follows the literal meanings from the concordance:
quote- " Word 8346 "sixty" means 'a multiple of word 8337'. Word 8337 means 'six (as an overplus beyond the fingers of the hand)' and gives '16'. This is derived from the number '6' plus the number of fingers on both hands '10'; 6 +10 =16." - end quote.I agree with Mr Pegg and am happy that the Old English scribes may not have used the correct meaning and given it as 60, but I am putting this verse on my list of things to double check, as I am only 85 percent happy with his overall 'decoding' of this verse. I usually expect at least 95 percent (allowing for my own disagreements and opinions). What an inconsistency !!
In previous posts people have been dismissing Mr Pegg using Hebrew and Greek etymology and the associated Latin meanings and encoding methods of those ancient times, yet now you are suggesting that the Greek writer John, was talking about the Roman Nero Caesar, and as evidence you use the Hebrew translation of Nero's name (as Mr Pegg does plus the Latin association), use the Hebrew letters as numbers (where did that come from?), and manipulate those decimal based numbers (that were not in existence in John's time), and come up with a solution that apparently matches a religious symbolic number mentioned in the Bible.I would have the same reaction to this method as you are having to Mr Pegg's methods, except for the reality of it all: you have just described one of the many other methods that Mr Pegg employs to find his 'hidden messages'.
So you now have to decide whether his methods, which you are using yourself when it suits you, are valid, or whether what you wrote is just a load of babble as many people claim Mr Pegg's work to be.If you truly believe in the number - Hebrew - letter - Greek associations that you have mentioned, then I am sure you will find some of the other discoveries of Mr Pegg's fascinating when you come across them.

Yes, a Dos boot disk could work, but it is not the standard set up that comes from a shop when you buy a computer. And it is not just setting up Windows NT.This was a list of disks that came with a PC 386 computer system when purchased in the early 1990s in Australia.
A computer requires a graphics card, which in turn requires graphics software to be installed.
If you want sound, and video capabilities, it’s the same deal - software has to be installed for the hardware. (Also the Intel processor for the Maths processor.)For your argument to be valid, it seems that the video, sound, and graphics software may not be needed - but that is incorrect, if the system is to function properly - and run the Ancients cd-rom.

In the early 1990s I personally was first using a 386 PC just using DOS and a screen menu programme, then I came across Mr Pegg's work in 1998.
I had my PC 486 upgraded to run cd-roms and to do so I added on a "Sound Blaster Discovery CD 16 kit (Model MK4021 by Creative Labs, 1994, 3.5 floppy release, Aust barcode 5465117991), and installed Windows for Workgroups NT (which used 8 floppies).The kit was available off-the-shelf and available throughout Australia. I believe it may be the same one that Mr Pegg utilized (going from the details he provides).
I always thought Windows3.x were all the same, but Windows NT has 8 disks - as Mr Pegg cites.Reading from the box (which I still have because it is solid for storage and has a nice handle) the Discovery Kit came with:
Sound Blaster 16 stereo sound card, double speed cd-rom drive, speakers, and the following software.
Aldus Photostyler Special Edition and the New Grolier Multimedia Encyclopedia - oh, and Lemmings.The minimum requirements for this were: an IBM-PC 386SX, Windows 3.1, with 4MB Ram and a 3.5 floppy drive. Also included were the following CD-Roms : Sound Blaster CD graphics, 1994, Sound Blaster CD, 1994, Screen Singer 006, 1994, Grolier Encyclopedia, 1993, and MS-VIDEO, 1993.OS - I have seen two versions of the Windows 3 File Manager - dated 1993 and 1995. They both seem the same to me. It is not a random computer - it was the specific cd-rom upgrade available in Australia in the mid 1990s that ran on a 386Sx (Dx if you include the Intel Maths Co-processor) that you could buy off the shelf.
This specific package running on a 386DX using Windows NT and Dos 6.21 with a SVGA for the Video playback had sixteen 3.5 floppy disks.Something else that has been on my mind: Why is there the exact same computer system described in the related biblical stories (Old Testament and Mormon) that Ronald Pegg from Australia used in the mid 1990s ?

Hi, Yeah, it takes a while to investigate each word, doesn't it.My first response is to thank you for the time and effort you are putting in to this.
I know how long this all takes as I am trying to investigate two other translations (one being French), respond to other forum questions, and have a family life too - this lot took me 9 hours.Many years ago when I first came across Mr Pegg's work, I checked each word to Strong's Concordance and an English dictionary at that time. The meanings he quoted were written up in the references that he cited.The first thing I have noticed is that most of your given 'translations' for the words of Exodus 35:11-14, while they appear to disagree with what Mr Pegg has presented to us, is also different to what I am finding in Strong's Concordance myself.
So the first query that needs to be cleared up is - what concordance are you using ?I am using "The New Strong's Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible" by James Strong, Thomas Nelson Publishers, USA, 1995 edition.: which is an extended version of the 1984 publication - it has a "completely new typesetting" that is supposed to assist us in not getting strained or tired eyes.
As far as I can deduce, this is the same edition that Mr Pegg used.I have also cross checked the reference numbers to an electronic version of Strong's Concordance, but do not use their given meanings, as, like the 'modern' versions of the Bible which have changed the context and flow of many stories, the 'modern' printed and electronic versions of Strongs only contain the "known" religious meanings and interpretations that suit the belief system of the publisher, etc.Down to business now to check Strong's Concordance
35:11
tabernacle 4908 'a residence' (including a shepherd's hut; the lair of animals, figuratively - the grave; also the Temple); specifically - the Tabernacle.
The "Tabernacle" 4908 is a specific religious term for the dwelling place of the Lord, but its original Hebrew meaning was just a general one of 'a residence of' (a shepherd's hut, lair of animals, the grave, the temple). (see note 1 later)tent 168 'a tent' as clearly conspicuous from a distance. (from 166 'to be clear'.)
So "clear" is the etymological feel for what type of 'tent' it is - a clear tent.
You appear to have used the given religious meaning and interpretation, and not what Dr Strong states as the prim root.covering 4372 a covering (from 3680 which properly means 'to plump' as in to fill up hollows.
So "to plump (as in fill up the hollows)" is the etymological meaning for this word.
You have not investigated this word. It is a different word reference for 'covering' than in 35:12 - 4539.taches 7165 'a knob or belaying-pin (from its swelling form)' (from 7164, a prim root meaning 'to protrude'.)
Looking in an English dictionary: knob = a rounded lump or protuberance: protuberance = a thing that protrudes.
The etymological meaning given in Strong's Concordance for this biblical "tache" is a protruding rounded lump or 'a thing that protrudes'.
Your meaning of 'hook' is not in my concordance. (see note 2 later)boards 7175 is from an unused root that means 'to split off' and is given the meaning 'slab'.
Slab = a flat, broad, fairly thick piece of something.
So what is being described here is 'a flat, broad, fairly thick piece of something that splits off'.bars 1280 a bolt (from 1272 meaning 'to bolt' as in 'to figuratively flee suddenly') and is given two meanings - bar and fugitive.
Bolt = a sliding bar for locking a door. Fugitive = fleeing or having fled.
So what is being described here is 'a sliding bar that flees suddenly'.
Your meanings are not in the concordance.pillars 5982 a column (as standing) from 5975 meaning 'to stand'.sockets 134 a basis (of a column) with given meanings of 'foundation' and 'socket', from the same as 113 which is from an unused root (meaning 'to rule') as in sovereign or controller.
So this "socket' is a basis of a column with its etymological feel of a ruling 'controller'. (I can see where and how Mr Pegg obtained his conclusion.)
(see note 3)35:11 reads as "A residence, a tent (as clearly conspicuous from a distance), a covering (to plump as in fill up the hollows), a thing that protrudes, a flat, broad, fairly thick piece of something that splits off, a sliding bar that flees suddenly, a column (as standing), sockets (a basis of a column - a controller)".(see note 4 later)35:12
ark 727 a box, from 717 in the sense of gathering.
So the etymological feel of this ark is 'a gathering box'.staves 905 properly means 'separation', from 909 meaning 'to divide'.thereof is not an original Hebew word.mercy seat 3727 a lid, from 3722 meaning to cover. Lid = a moveable cover.
(still working on your Ex 25:17-22 challenge. I have found the two cherubs and the turning faces in the ancients cd-rom.)vail 6532 a separatrix (from same as 6531 meaning 'to break apart'), but has been given a meaning of 'the sacred screen'.
Separatrix = a punctuation mark (/) used to separate related items of information.covering 4539 a cover (veil) from 5526 which is a prim root properly meaning 'to entwine as a screen'.35:12 reads as "a (gathering) box. Separation, the movable lid (mercy seat). Sacred screen covering".35:13
table 7979 'a spread out table' (from 7971 meaning 'to send away').staves 905 a separation
Pegg has used the English meaning of staves, being "rod or staff' as in the rod or staff of Moses (which I think is a reasonable association). But excluding this English meaning, it is 'separation'.vessels 3627 something prepared, as in any apparatus.shewbread 3899 & 6440 (made up of two words) 3899 meaning 'food (for man or beast)': 6440 is a plural word and means 'the face (as the part that turns)'.35:13 reads as "a spread out table. Separation, a prepared apparatus. Food for man, the turning faces".candlestick 4501 is the feminine of 4500 in the sense of 5216 which means 'a lamp (to glisten)'.light 3974 a luminous body.furniture 3627 a prepared apparatus.lamps 5216 lamp or light (from a prim root meaning 'to glisten').oil 8081 grease, but from 8080 to shine.35:14 reads as "the (glistening) candlestick of the luminous body. A prepared apparatus, to glisten and to shine".incense 7004 a fumigation, from 6999 meaning 'to smoke' through the idea of fumigation in a close place and perhaps thus driving out the occupants. This provides the perception of driving out the occupants by making smoke.altar 4196 an altar from 2076 'to slaughter an animal (usually in sacrifice)'.staves 905 a separationanointing 4888 unction, from 4886 meaning to rub with oil.oil 8081 grease, from 8080 meaning 'to shine'.sweet 5561 to smell sweetincense 7004 a fumigation, from 6999 meaning 'to make smoke (to drive out the occupants)'.hanging 4539 a cover (veil) from 5526 which is a prim root properly meaning 'to entwine as a screen'.entering in 6607 an openingtabernacle 4908 a residence35:15 reads as "to make smoke (to drive out the occupants), an altar. Separation, unction to shine to smell sweet, to make smoke (to drive out the occupants) the covering the opening the residence".Time for another toilet break, and a coffee !OK, back again. Notes first, then translation.
- - - -Notes
(1) tabernacle 4908 residence of' (a shepherd's hut, lair of animals, the grave, the temple).
Each of these classifications describe a picture from the Ancients cd-rom that reside in the computer (but seen on the separate monitor).(2) In reference to Mr Pegg's "The Old English word for "belaying" lecgan comes from two words 'be-lay'. "Pin" means 'to hold firmly in one position'. So using the Old English and Hebrew etymologies, "taches" refers to something that is belayed and is held firmly in one position on a protrusion", you say "invalid logic with the language again. you can't do that. you're taking the etymology of an older translation".Here is how I see it. To use the given meanings in the Bible using modern English meanings would be wrong, as individual modern Bibles have been translated and interpreted to say what the specific religious group translating it want it to say as far as their own beliefs are concerned. I agree with Mr Pegg that we need to use a language that is closer to the Hebrew than modern English.
Except for the early Latin and Greek versions of the Bible, an English version was by Old English translators in 1611AD - but they still used the Latin 'Vulgate' Bible as a source for their context. (This is why some of the known Roman additions are still in modern English Bibles !)While our modern understanding of the Old English words is often quite different, Strongs is the link between the Hebrew meanings and what the 1611 scribes thought the Hebrews were saying. This is the point Mr Pegg is making - Strong's Concordance gives both the original Hebrew meanings and the given Old English religious meanings. Many people go straight to the given meaning and just use Strongs as a dictionary - and find exactly what the Bible says in the surface text - from the religious perspective (as you too are appearing to find).What Mr Pegg is proposing, is to use what Dr Strong says the Old English words from the Bible mean. In the case in reference here, Dr Strong says "taches" is a 'belaying-pin'. Now, do I use my understanding of the modern meaning of 'belaying-pin, or one that is closer to when the 1611 word 'taches' was written ? The closest meaning IS the Old English meaning of "belaying-pin", as the modern word is directly derived from the two OE words as stated in an English dictionary. So instead of relying on the 1611 religious scribes meaning of taches, Dr Strong tells us it is 'belaying-pin' which at the time the word taches was written, meant "be- lay", where "be-" is an Old English prefix meaning "about", and "lay" means to 'place or put so to rest'.Without taking it the one step further that Pegg does (which I am beginning to see may be your objection), I get for taches - 'placed to rest about' (which as far as etymology is concerned, seems to describe the context of the noun being investigated) and somewhat describes the purpose of a knob or hook.I think what Mr Pegg has discovered (come across !) is that the etymology of the words via Strong's Concordance using the original Latin and Old English words of the modern English words, on another level of understanding, explains the context of the word under investigation.The "translation problem" appears when what Dr Strong says the ancient word meant something different to what the Old English scribes used - with that translation being the only one we know about - so we automatically question the new data.(3) You mention "a similar idea" such as 'the garden of eden' and state that "you have to look at just the individual words, its root, etc.".
Well, you looking at 'similar ideas' is NOT focusing on the individual word being examined either - this is bringing in preconceived ideas and making the word being examined fit in with the rest of the religious context.
Mr Pegg has used the meanings given in Strong's Concordance and employed their given etymological context and NOT the given 'similar idea' such as meaning 'the garden of eden'.
In this case, "sockets" means 'a basis of a column' with its root specifically being from 'to rule' as in sovereign or controller.(4) You say "you're changing the fundamental purpose of the verse, a big no-no".
But you have used the 'given religious meanings' and not the original prim root or known meanings as stated by Strong. It is the OE religious interpretations and translations that have changed the fundamental purpose of the text. Mr Pegg, using Dr Strong's stated meanings, is returning the text to its original context.You also say "there is no bits about hollows" - but you have used the wrong word number (assuming you used the same one as that in 35:12) for "covering" in 35:11. When the etymology is checked for 4372 via 3680, it DOES refer to 'hollows'.- - - - - -
Matching Hebrew descriptions:
Remember, the Hebrew was not written in verses and with the English sentence structure and punctuation.
Exodus 35:11-15 using the meanings stated by Dr Strong originally read as:It is no surprise that some of the sentences do not read correctly in English syntax, but what is being related is clear to me.A "thing" being a sliding bar that flees suddenly, protrudes (and has the hollow covered up), and is a flat, broad, fairly thick piece of something that splits off from the residence = a cd-rom tray.The standing "column" that has "sockets" and is a 'gathering box' = a computer's tower CPU case.
The "sacred screen" = the monitor (which is separate from the CPU).
The "spread out table" = the keyboard (which is separate from the CPU).
The "prepared apparatus" = a 'compact disk' that "glistens and shines" and is placed on the altar (drive tray), and is food (knowledge) for man.
The specific Ancient cd-rom has a face (mask) on it, and turns when put in the drive, but the "prepared apparatus" notation refers to what is being seen on the separate sacred screenThe "turning faces" = the five faces from the introduction sequence that turn and face each other.
Following this "the (glistening) candlestick of the luminous body" = flickering red block letters of START VOYAGE that appear over the red sun (windrose).The reference "to make smoke (to drive out the occupants)" = ancient understanding that to obtain the knowledge (food for man) from the different civilizations (from within the cd-rom), the burning of fire (flickering candlestick) makes 'smoke' and drives them onto the screen.The "unction' = the religious reverence a computer was given in ancient times, and that placing the 'food' on the altar in the Lord's temple gained an audience with the gods (the turning faces).While my translations are not exactly as Mr Pegg says, using the original Hebrew etymological meanings instead of the given religious ones does seem to confirm his claims.EddyPS. more to come much later RE: your next post.

This was written before your # 34 post.You are obviously using "modern meanings' from a 'modern' concordance - no wonder you are finding different meanings to the one's Mr Pegg (and myself) present.The original meanings stated by Dr James Storng in the mid 1800s have apparently been 'modified' to suit the new electronic age.It will be up to individual readers and examiners of Mr Pegg's work to decide whether to use 'modern' adapted concordances for convenience, or to use the book version that actually contains the original meanings.Here are my responses to your previous comments - using the book version of Strongs. NO, No, no. We are not looking for the 'most common translation' - we are seeking the original Hebrew word meaning and context !! The ones Dr James Strong gave in the mid 1800s.
Your concordance has apparently removed all his original meanings that do not fit in with the religious context, and just left what religious scholars have chosen to believe the words meant.In my concordance it reads as 'to glisten'; a tablet (as polished) and gives board, plate, table - a glistening, polished tablet/plate.
And if you say these 'boards' refer to the tables that Moses was given, then you are getting closer to what the original meanings of the words are really trying to tell us. The tables that he held were glistening polished plates - attributes of a compact disk. Only if you use the religious meaning, and not the actual original Hebrew meaning.
Moses is holding two plastic cd-rom cases (containing the Ancients and Grolier cd-roms). He doesn't break them as in smash them - he bursts them open.
H-word 7665 "brake" means 'to burst', and "burst" means 'to break open (as in to come apart suddenly and violently)'.
This means that Moses did not break the two Tables (as in destroyed them), but 'burst them open as to make them come apart'.How many times have you ended up with the plastic cases in pieces after using extra force to open them when they stick together ?
Ahmaybe this is what Moses WAS saying - they burst apart (as in opened) but also broke into pieces - but not destroying the contents. In my concordance 3595 says: properly something round (as excavated or bored), ie. also a pulpit or platform, and comes from the same as 3564 which means 'to dig through'.
So this 'platform' is specifically bored through, which to me means it has a hole in it."cd-trays are no good at holding water" UNLESS the compact disk that you are putting on it has a picture of water thereon - as the Ancients cd-rom DOES !This glistening polished plate that Moses has just broken out of its case, has the face of the sun-god thereon. This is the god to whom he believes he is communicating. This 'god' then gives forth information - which has been religiously described as "food for man". The terms 'bread' and 'roll' are something that you eat - but the description "roll' (as I have explained previously) refers to something that rolls - the compact disk in the cd-drive. But man also drinks. The same association has been made to the water image that appears on the disk - but we drink from a cup - so 'cup' and 'bread (roll)' have become the religious terms used to describe obtaining 'food for man' from the oracle apparatus (the computer system). H-word 5178 comes from 5154 which is the feminine of 5153 and has, as part of its explanation "from the red color of the throat of a serpent".
So Dr Strong has used color descriptions in his etymology. Also, this 'throat of the red serpent' to which that particular word refers, elsewhere in the Bible, pertains to a red throated serpent that is one of the icons on the Ancients cd-rom.I have seen pale yellowish coloured computers many times, although they haven't the shining gloss of my rain-water tank tap (or a trombone) - but its close, about five shades paler though. In the original Hebrew text there is NO association with women. This association has been added (it is in square brackets) by the 1611 OE religious scribes who only knew of 'women's mirrors' and not that in the future a computer's screen will act like a mirror - or give visions.
For the same reason you are finding the religious meanings in your concordance, you are believing all the written English words in your Bible - of the "women" should not be in the text at all - it was added some 2,840 years later. Thanks for this. It does clarify one thing - while Mr Pegg has referred to Windows 3 as being 8 bit (which you point out is incorrect), it does show that DOS was 8 bit (whether it ran on a basic 386 or 486).
This clarifies what Mr Pegg was trying to say about dating the technology (but he has got it slightly wrong) - that the 8 bit DOS architecture dates to a time period of late 80s to mid 1990s.
I will make amendments to his references to this at a later time, thanks. Dr Strong shows that H-word "Eighteen" is made up of two words, 8083 and 6240.
8083 means 'eight' as in a cardinal number. 6240 means 'ten' and in combination '-teen'.
Religious scribes have added the numbers together to get 18 (8 + 10).
Mr Pegg has used the two words separately - 8 and 10. As with the previous number '18', Mr Pegg has used a visual and verbal description of the numbers rather than a mathematical one. It has been previously pointed out that the ancient people would not understand the language (of the time traveller) - so they would not understand our maths either.Holding up both hands (5 + 5) then one hand and a thumb from the other (5 + 1) = 16.These 'number' decodings need to be investigated further, in context with the rest of his discoveries (which I hope to do one day). Revelations 'beast' - 666.
666 in Hebrew as alpha designations = www
This makes the World Wide Web the 'beast'.
LOL ?

Instead of Latin - English - Greek, how about Greek words in a French text representing numbers. In his Nostradamus investigations, Mr Pegg says that the first two lines of this quatrain refers to the nine Arab League nations that did not vote to go to war with Iraq."Separated from judgement and advice" = not taking place in a vote.
"Nine will be set apart" = the nine Arab League nations that did not vote.This IS a match to an historical event, BUT what about the 9 mothers who did not want to pay for their children's school fees the other day - that is also an historical match.But seriously, this would remain just a coincidence except that, what Mr Pegg has found, is that the date of the event in this quatrain is given in line 4. (ie. something else has to confirm the described event to confirm it is the correct event - in this case a numerical sequence written as letters. In other quatrains it is astronomical datings.)The fact that there are Greek alphabetic letters amongst the French words is a direct clue of an encoding. (just as 'in the Hebrew tongue' in Revelations.)
"Kappa, theta, and lambda" (written as Greek letters in the quatrain) are the 10th, 8th, and 11th letters of the Greek alphabet. "10:8:11"
This is a day-month-year number format that derives 10-8-1990 which is August 10th 1990.
(2000 subtract 11 inclusive gives 1990)Historical Search:(21 subtract 12 leaves "9 being set apart".)Nostradamus exactly dates the "separation of the nine" (the countries that separated themselves from the vote) using Greek alphabetic letters in his French verses.This 'historical story' is also verbally described in the Bible several times such as the "twelve stones" of Joshua 4, and the "offerings on the eight day" of Leviticus 9, but is very much covered over by religious expressions and interpretations which obscures this 'history' - unless the meanings of the original words are used as per Strong's Concordance plus the other decoding techniques Mr Pegg list as 'concepts'.Here is one such concept as explained by Mr Pegg:There is no way that I am going to be able to explain all of this here, so if you wish to persue his alpha-numerical decodings, you will have to start at Booklet One of Mr Pegg's research yourself.
Even then, it is going to be hard going and somewhat confusing until you have read most of his 1,000 pages of research to see where this fits in with the overall context of things.

Being in 'modern English' is the problem. Modern English does not fully reflect the ancient meanings and contexts."funny lengthy descriptions in vocabulary uncommon today" - duh..that uncommon vocabulary IS explaining the ancient meanings and contexts.In my examples I have been replacing the OE word from the KJV Bible with the written "root or known" meaning as stated by Dr Strong.
This is not translating as such, but replacing the 'modern' English words with those given by Strong.
You on the other hand, are using the given religious meanings in modern English that have evolved over a long period of religious time. Evolved means changed into something new and different.You were complaining that Mr Pegg uses Latin and OE words that came about thousands of years after the Hebrew words were written.
BUT you are admitting using modern English words that are up to 3,200 years since the Hebrew.The readers of this thread will have to make up their own minds - new meanings, or the original Hebrew ones as cited by Dr Strong. Two of the cd-roms contain pictures of dinosaurs - with one moving around in an audio/visual film as a comet hits the earth . Yep.again you have confirmed that you are using 'modern updated' meanings, and therefore not the original ones cited in the mid 1800s by Strong. Ohyeah, I agree and vehemently recommend that people personally check out not only the meanings, but how the meanings in modern versions are quite different to the originals.This is the whole point of Mr Pegg's discoveries - the original meanings have been covered over by subsequent religious scholars producing newer 'meanings' for the Bible. No. Latin - English only came into play in a few examples.
Simply, the OE words from the KJV Bible are being replaced with the written "root or known" meaning as stated by Dr Strong - often no translation or interpretation is required. You have admitted and affirmed that you are using a 'modern' electronic version of Strong's that has been "updated" - therefore changed from the original.
Using your version of Strongs appears to negate Mr Pegg's claims.But if you were to use the original mid 1800s meanings as cited by Dr James Strong - you would find that what I have overviewed in previous threads and presented here, does in fact support Mr Pegg's claims.

We need to ascertain what the Hebrew words originally meant in respect to what the OE scribes wrote, not what they mean to us now in 2004.
That's why Mr Pegg uses Strongs - the ancient meanings and contexts are given. He may have. Mr Pegg tells us that the Holy Bible cd-rom is what was called the Brass Plate by Smith in the mid 1800s, and was one of the eight 'plates' in the box.
Before the end of that century, Dr James Strong produced a concordance.
Did he see Smith's apparatus ? Was Strong visited by a time traveller (who helped him write the concordance) ? Exactly how a compact disk has been described in other cultures.
India
Ganesha is the Hindu god of wisdom, and the first scribe and the god of scribes. He is also known as 'Chakra-Raja' (Lord of the Wheel).
He is usually depicted holding the lotus or sacred thread, the Ankus, the sacred conch shell, and the Chakra (wheel). His mount is a mouse. {sacred thread + mouse = computer's mouse and cable}
Vishnu is a primeval being — a sun god. He is known as the god of blue water {sea image from the cd}, and among other things, holds a wheel or sun disk (Chakra) in one of his four hands. He rides in an eight wheeled chariot {represents the eight pointed Windrose that 'takes' you to your destination within the cd}.Celtic
Arianrhod was an ancient earth goddess, and was known as the ‘silver wheel’.
Branwen is the ‘white raven’. {the white cursor}
Dylan Eil Ton ‘Son of the waves’ is the spirit of the sea; the sound of the waves are said to be the sound of his dying groans. {the 'sound of the waves' are the sound of the waves from the introduction sequence of the cd}China
The I Ching symbol incorporates two circles within a larger circle which have been drawn to give the illusion that they are revolving.France
Nostradamus depicted two magic circles in his illustrations to his son Cesar, and he called them The Wheel of Destiny (of Nations) and The Wheel of Time. {Ancients and Grolier cd-roms}Moses
In Exodus 31:18 he describes "two tables of testimony, tables of stone" which were later put in the 'ark of the covenant'.
"tables (3871)" = a polished tablet or plate. "ark" 727 = box. "covenant" 1285 = 'a compact'.
So, the biblical 'box of the compact' contained polished plates (that glistened).New Testament
Hebrews 9:4 talks about this same "ark of the covenant" and its contents, the "tables of the covenant".
Greek word "ark" 2787 = a box (the sacred ark).
tables 4109 = a moulding-board, ie. a flat surface "plate" or tablet.
So the Greeks described this sacred plate (being the polished glistening one from the Hebrew story) as 'flat'.You said you would describe it as a "wheel or a flat shiny dish". Apparently people in the past did just that ! Mr Pegg has traced the apparent journey of the cd-roms around the Middle Eastern region from ancient Mesopotamia to the Jerusalem Temple in Israel - via the Elephantine Temple in Egypt. Then in around 600BC the 'pieces of the temple' (the computer apparatus) were taken to Babylon, where Daniel and Ezekiel viewed them. From that point 'Christian history' looses track of the 'ark of the covenant' and temple pieces (computer apparatus and disk box).
BUT Mormon history takes over where this leaves off, and tells of the 'plates' and the 'box' that were next seen by Moroni in 421 AD in America, and then by Joseph Smith in the 1800s.In his use of the original words, Mr Pegg has shown that the tablets Moses was said to have broken, were in fact 'burst apart', and when he received the second set, he then had four cd-roms. The other two are Redshift2 and Holy Bible. So there were four cd-roms in the 'ark of the covenant', one being reddish-brown in colour - the Holy Bible.Back to the Mormon description of what was in the 'box' that they unearthed.
"Small and large plates" = 3.5 floppy disks and compact disks.
One set was called "The Plates of Brass" and were brought from Jerusalem in 600BC by the people of Levi.
These contained "the five books of Mosesand also a record of the Jews from the beginningand also the prophecies of the holy prophets" - ie. what we now know as "The Old Testament".So this brass plate definitely contained the moasic law - known as the five book of Moses.By colour, date, place, and exact content of that ancient plate, Mr Pegg has identified it as the Holy Bible cd-rom.
Moses is first holding two plastic cd-rom cases (containing the Ancients and Grolier cd-roms). He doesn't break them as in smash them - he bursts them open and views them on the oracle apparatus (probably in the Temple at Elephantine). Next he is given two more - Redshift2 and the Holy Bible.You say "even if they're cd's, which they're not" [the tablets held by Moses], they [would not] contain the moasic law.
But the brass coloured Holy Bible cd-rom DOES !Note: H-word 7665 "brake" from the 1995 book form of Strong's Concordance
quote: 7665 shabar; a prim root; to burst means 'to burst'.
BUT the exact spelling of 'shabar' is also represented by H-word 7663 which means 'to scrutinize' - and word 7666 which means 'to deal in grain'.
According to the concordance, they are all pronounced the same.This means that Moses did not break the two Tables (as in destroyed them), but 'burst them open as to make them come apart' - or did he scrutinize the two glistening polished flat plates.
{I will say it before you do - or did he sell them for grain}This shows that there are three meanings for the one Hebrew word. One fits in with the modern religious use of words, while one fits in with Mr Pegg's discoveries, and the other ? The mountain in question refers to the orange mountain from the Greek presentation. The "glory of the Lord" is the description given to the white highlight box that 'flashes' and surrounds each icon as the cursor is taken up the mountain side. If "scrutinize" is the correct action Moses did to the tablets, or even breaking open the storage devices, then describing the mountain in the manner told in the Bible makes perfect sense - after breaking open and viewing the Grolier cd (for example) he returned to the Ancients cd, and then went back up "the mountain". I agree that physically cd-trays are no good at holding water.
But figuratively, (and most of the Bible stories are accounts of oral stories containing imagery) a compact disk that has an image of water thereon may be seen as placing a cup or bowl of water on the 'gods' altar that has a hole in it. But you clarified "roll - as in a bread roll -- comes from the action "to roll." it describes the process used to make it, not it's function."
You appear to be saying that the verb 'to roll' IS associated with the noun.So in the word "roll" in the context of a scroll (modern terms include book and .doc file) -- as in a compact disk that holds information like a book -- the action "to roll" describes the process of the disk turning in the drive, while its function is to be read "from within, from the back side" by the optical laser.And its purpose it to provide knowledge to man - 'eat' the information and we are 'fed'.
John uses similar phraseology in Revelations 10:10 - "And I took the little book out of the angel's hand, and ate it up; and it was in my mouth sweet as honey: and as soon as I had eaten it, my belly was bitter". WRONG This is the jacket - the disk has the same picture on it, but the colour is somewhat faded and grainy.
I see a sail boat floating on an actual picture of the sea within the shores of the Mediterranean coastline. ErYeah. It's called quoting - especially when my posts contain introductions such asandAnyone who has bothered to read my profile submitted to this forum would already know that I am the coordinator of the PPHC Study Group in Southern Australia - and have that web site as my 'home page'.
In personal correspondence with the administration of this forum, they were made aware who I was and what I was doing - before they granted me the current posting privileges.Anyone who has visited the PPHC Study Group and has read several of the ABOUT pages would know that I am the chief consultant for the PPHC Study Group web site that concerns The Pegg Project material. I do not know.
But technology shock would be my best guess from an analytical point of view.
He knew words were written on scrolls (the pair of cylindrical objects containing a flat rectangular piece of paper that you cite) so when he was shown the 'flat round compact' and was told it was like a book and contained words etc., he just described it in the best way he could - and took the messenger's word for it.Let's look at it from his point of view (not knowing it was a time traveller).
An angel of his god had just appeared, and told him to write down what he sees and hears, and after being shown these things he does what he is told to the best of his understanding.Would he bother to try to describe something that he did not recognize nor understand how it works, except to note where the information was coming from - within a thing 'like a book' which is put on the 'throne thing' of the sacred oracle ?I imagine he would almost be totally overwhelmed by the encounter, yet he does a fair job at recounting the file size of the Ancients file that he was told - and describing the sequences of images.I believe he would be in awe of the account of the 1991 Persian Gulf War and how the Roman civilization will combine both Judaism and [the original] Christianity into its own 'new' religion.I have answered your question -- Eddy.

Thanks, you have provided facts here and not an opinion.
I can see that Mr Pegg has incorrectly stated that - the KJV Bible, written in 1611, was written by Old English scribes - and that in the mid 1800s Dr James Strong wrote his concordance to explain the original Hebrew and Greek meanings of those Old English words.The correct narrative of this should read as "In 1890 Dr James Strong published his concordance wherein the original Hebrew and Greek meanings of the KJV English Bible were specifically cross referenced". I read the Bible in English - written in modern English (as you state). This version is what the English translators wrote - not the original Hebrew authors. The English translation and interpretation has EVERYTHING to do with it. IF they got some of it wrong (as others prior to Mr Pegg have declared), then the English translation and interpretation that I read may therefore NOT be what the original Hebrew meant.
It is this "English" translation that Mr Pegg is examining (incorrectly called by him the Old English translation).
He is using the previously quoted edition of Strongs to check these words and has found inconsistencies. I have no idea from where you have obtained this meaning. I am not using it because it does not appear in Strongs Concordance.
H-word 7165 "taches" is given as "qerec from 7164; a [/I]knob[/I] or belaying-pin (from its swelling form). On the Introduction sequence of the Ancients cd-rom the waves of the sea physically move (two images are animated once) as we hear the sound of breaking surf.
For some reason, the person who created the ancient myth has reported this sequence's SOUND as the character Dylan Eil Ton's dying groans.
No metaphor on Pegg's behalf - he is just matching ancient descriptions to this sequence's associated sound track. Strongs reference gives "compact'.
Mr Pegg is not 'changing it to a noun' - the word 'compact' IS also a noun, meaning 'a small cosmetic case' being one that is hinged, in two pieces, and breaks open (just like a cd case !). I will check this up at a later date, based upon your comments "the same words were written on them" and "Moses breaks them, and god replaces them with exact copies" being 2 + 2 = 2 + 2 (not 4).My query -- didn't a story concerning Jacob also involve two sets of "tables": as an extra set being given ? The 'future' time people who placed the encoded 'E.L.S.' history in the original Hebrew letter sequence (of Genesis). In Strongs, H-word 5514 "sinai" is "of uncertain derivation". This means that the origin of the Hebrew word describing this particular 'mountain' is not known or is at least uncertain. To me this means the original Hebrew word does not automatically point to it being a real place.
In other ancient myths, Mr Pegg has found similar references to a 'holy mountain' - which is also a reference to the Greek mountain from the Ancients cd-rom. Not quite. Greek word 974 (a diminutive of 975) = the "little open book" of Revelations chapter 10 = the little open book that is seen on every civilization's screen. When this is selected, it provides information in a windows based format and scrolls exactly as you suggest. The 'white cursor' of the Ancients cd-rom is a two image sail-boat whose sail 'raises' when it passes over an active icon on the screen. It is only a "white arrow" during three sequences, being the SCALA logo, Introduction gods, and disk Title.
In ancient and classical myths the white arrow cursor has been likened to a bolt of lightning (with the associated sound of 'thunder' of the breaking surf).
The white 'sailboat' cursor literally flits around the screen like a bird in the 'sky'.In the OT Noah story it is called a dove. Also, Zeus (at Dodona, an oracle to the Romans) spoke through the mouths of the Peleiads (doves) {= the sail-boat cursor(s)}.RE: New Testament. "The Spirit of God descended like a dove" (Matthew 3:16).
The "spirit" = the white sail-boat cursor. {where "God" = the five 'gods' of the Ancients Introduction}

I'm back "He rows in the sky in your ship" = a boat rowing in the sky = a legend of a flying boat.
"Flies as a bird" = the movement around the screen of the white sail-boat cursor.
"Settles as a beetle" = settle on the red wind-rose (that looked like a beetle to the ancient Egyptians).
"comes to land in your ship" = comes to the Map Page (earth/land) after travelling in 'your ship'.
"Your ship" = the large sail boat on the Voyage page (sky/sea page).
"Ascend out of the horizon" = move the white sail boat up above the water towards the red wind-rose.
The "navigator of your ship" = the person who operates the computer.
"He is there with his staff in his hand" = he is there with the mouse (and cable) in his hand, which operates the cursor as just described in the story.The following extracts are from various myths and legends that incorporate descriptions of the "ship" on the 'sea/sky' page from the Ancients cd-rom. The "underworld" and the "Queen of the underworld" = the Egyptian page and the bust of Nefertiti thereon.
"A series of seven gates" = the seven icons from the map page. The 7th is the Egyptian icon.
The "decrees of civilization" = an ancient name given to the Ancients cd-rom.
The "Boat of Heaven" = the ship on the Voyage screen (sea/sky page).The "Four Cardinal Points = the wind-rose.
The four faces "bull, eagle, lion, and man" = the lion, calf, man, and capital (like eagle wings) icons from the Map Page. "Music to the air" = the musical soundtrack of the cd-rom.
A "ferocious lion" = the chimera icon (the lion).
A "pillar of stone" = the capital icon, which is a pillar of stone. The "Light" and the "sun chariot" = the red wind-rose, perceived as the sun. Clicking on this icon make you 'travel' to the map page.
"Two white stags" and "white horses" = the two versions of the white sail-boat cursor - an analogy: comparing sail boats and the wind that drives them, with chariots and the horses that drive them.
"Violent storms" = the perception that clicking on the wind-rose has produced violent winds which blows the 'sailboat' to the map page.
The "chariot drawn by two white stags" is an ancient concept describing the 'vehicle' and what takes us to the next screen - as is "a charioteer driving the sun across the sky". The "raft or ship which carries us across the ocean of this world" = the large sailboat that carries us across the water to the map page. The "ship" and "into the ship" and "ship was now in the midst of the sea" = the large sailboat on the sea (and sky page).
"Also with him other little ships" = the two versions of the white sail boat cursor.
A "great storm of wind" and "the wind was contrary" = the red wind-rose (creating wind or a storm).
The "Spirit of God descended like a dove" = the white sailboat cursor moved like a dove (colour and movement).
"Up into a mountain" = the orange mountain from the Greek contents page.The following imagery is described in the Muslim Koran. (English translation) "Ships which sail like mountains upon the ocean" = the large size of the sailboat from the sea/sky page.
"He calms the wind, so that they lie motionless" = the perception that the wind is not blowing and the boat is not moving, due to the images being stationary on the screen.
"See how the ships speed upon the ocean" = the fast movement of the sail boat cursor 'ships' across the sea.
By the Mountain" refers to the mountain from the presentation.
"By the Scripture penned on unrolled parchment" = the little open book that is seen in each civilization.
"The Lofty Vault, and the swelling sea" = the sky and sea from the voyage screen (sea/sky page).
"The visited house" = the middle building (Everyday Life icon) from the Etruscan civilization. Yes, probably this was behind the idea to use the Greek citadel as the image for the 'contents page' for the Greek civilization when it was made in 1995. But at that time they were not aware that the cd-rom would be sent back to the past. The Greek contents page is the only page that shows an active icon as a shaded area with an outer white border*, as the 'spirit of god' (white sailboat cursor) moves over them. It was a visual thing that obviously took their attention.
To the ancient Hebrews, this was 'the glory of God' that went up and down the mountain.
(* The active icons on the Etruscan page (the Lion city) are highlighted with a white area, but no shading nor border.) It would be the Greek civilization that would write the New Testament - a document that created a new religion, Christianity, in opposition to the existing Hebrew faith.This is to do with the theme of religious warnings about 'false religions' that is found in the Bible. For example, the religious beast that lasts 1,260 years {Daniel, I think} refers to the 1,260 years of the Holy Roman Church from 546 to 1806 AD. You gave the answer yourself Therefore, the "modern accurate translation" (that you prefer to use) is using the 'modern translation' and not the original meanings that were current when the KJV Bible and Strong's Concordance were written.You refer to this fact when you cited But that "antiquated English usage of words" is what was understood when the KJV Bible and Strong's Concordance were written.Maybe I haven't presented Mr Pegg's reasons for using Strong's Concordance clearly enough, but in your own three words - "words change meaning" - you have hit the nail on the head.The KJV Bible uses antiquated English usage of words. Dr James Strong wrote his concordance in reference to these antiquated English words.
Therefore to establish the original meanings of the English words used in the KJV Bible, we need to refer to the meanings given by Dr James Strong that were written specifically for that version of the Bible.Mr Pegg is using the concordance that was written specifically for the KJV Bible - you are not, hence the different "modern" meanings that you are finding.It was these other scholars who alerted Mr Pegg to the fact that 'modern' translations and interpretations of the KJV Bible words may not be representing what was originally intend by the ancient Hebrew and Greek authors.To me it is obviously incorrect to use 'modern' translations and interpretations of words that we know to be possibly erroneous or plainly wrong.
S0 - (in Mr Pegg's studies) why not use the modern translation ? - because it may be wrong*.
SO - why use Strong's Concordance to obtain the meanings for the KJV Bible English words ? - because it was written specifically for the KJV Bible and contains the contemporary word meanings of the time. These apparently include the ones that during our discussions to date, differ to what Dr James Strong has catalogued, as you are using the 'modern' meanings and not the 1611AD contemporary meanings for the KJV English Bible. Do you mean the writings of Mormon, consisting of nine chapters in the LDS Bible, or the general name of the Bible of the Latter Day Saints known as 'The Book of Mormon - Another Testament of Jesus Christ ?The earlier books in the Mormon Bible originated from Jerusalem in 600BC and were completed in 421AD in America (if I understand the introduction to the Mormon Bible correctly).In any case, just as the KJV Bible is available now in English but was translated from the original Hebrew and Greek, the "Mormon Bible" was translated from another language(s ?) into English by Joseph Smith in the mid 1800s.
And just as the KJV Bible contains the 'antiquated English language' discussed above, so too does the English translation of the Mormon Bible.The Mormon Faith, as does the Christian Faith, uses the Old Testament as a historical/religious basis - as does the Muslim Faith of circa 600AD.
Therefore, all of the works relating to the OT stories that are retold in each of these subsequent faiths, are reporting (and have therefore been influenced by) the images from the Ancients cd-rom.
To put it another way, the mountain, sailboat, or scroll (book) that are referred to in the later faith's stories - are referring to the same imagery from the cd-rom. Each may have expressed these "images" in a different language and at a different period of history, but they are all referring to the same source.To find the original meanings of their texts we have to look through the religious 'modern' translations and interpretations, and use Strong's Concordance to obtain the contemporary meanings (circa 1800) of the 'modern' English words that we now read in the OT, NT, Koran, and Mormon Bible. Then why does he state "compact" and not 'contract' ?So investigating the etymology and 'feel' of the English word "covenant" used in the KJV Bible, we find;
H-word 1285 gives a compact because made by passing between pieces of flesh - from a word meaning 'to select' in the sense of 'cutting' - like to 'absolutely create'.Is a 'contract' or a "compact" disk being described by the origins cited by Dr James Strong ?A compact disk is "created" by "cutting" the digital data into an area "between pieces" of thin disks of plastic.To me, from his citations, Strong seems to be describing a "compact" disk.

If you are referring to the general uninformed paradoxial argument, then NO - you do not die.
But to which YOU do you refer ?Let's say, that from the year 2012 you come back and shoot 'yourself' dead in 2004.
To answer your question, you first need to understand that the 8 year older you is an 'external intruder' to the 2004 time line AND has LEFT the 2012 time line.
So anything that happens to the 8 year older 'you' now in 2004 will not effect the future you (2004-2012) from the original time line, but of course, if the 8 year older you dies in 2004 or later while here, then this 'intruder you' to the 2004 time line is dead.
On the original 2012 time line (from whence you came), you would have 'left the building' so to speak - you would not be there any more - because you are back in 2004.But back to the original 2004 'you'.
If you (the one from 2012) shoots the 2004 'you', that 2004 'you' is dead - but the 2012 'you' is still there - but 8 years older.
Now, if you do exactly the same things as the previous 2004 'you' did, then everything will be the same - except you are 8 years older.
But if you change things (probably the reason for going back) then the future from that point in 2004 will be different. This would CHANGE history from 2004 onwards - but if you do that, this is when the general "paradox" kicks in.Now, if you go straight back to your point of origin (time and place) one second after originally leaving, then the original 8 year older 'you' is back - but now as an 'external intruder' to the 2012 time line, just as anyone else who would be 'brought forward' to a future time would be.
YOU would still be alive - remembering all your life's history, including the back step event from the original time line 2004 to 2012 - but as the 2004 'you' died in 2004 there would not be any history of 'you' for that period. You would still exist (the 8 year older you), but no one would know who you are (except when your personal records up to 2004 when you were killed are viewed). In this case, you would only be able to return to the future if you had a time machine yourself, taken with you when you first back-stepped in 2012.
If no personal time machine, then as you have changed history substantially, then there may not be anyone in the future that knows you are back in the past (or even time travel may not have been invented yet at that future 2012 time) - hence you would be stranded in the 'new' 2004 time line. But YOU would still be there (8 years older).So travelling in time is not the paradox - the "time traveller" will still exist where/when ever he is - it is what you do when you are visiting past times that causes the problems.
Changing the past is not the best thing to do, as it will change the future - but there is another option that will alter the future, but not change the past - and derives no paradox if done carefully.Mr Pegg believes that the back steps to the past have been deliberately done as to not "change" the time line of 5000BC to 2002AD, but to alert us to an original "mistake" that caused the religions to form. Once this mistake is examined, and time travel is technologically mastered, then the back steps are undertaken to correct the documented mistakes, but not to ERASE them, as doing that would change history completely. This is why the chronology of back step 'mistakes' are "encoded" in ancient texts as warnings of future religions forming - they have now been revealed because we have past 1990 computer technology and the events described in the Bible (for example) have now actually occurred and are documented in our history books - the same books used by the 'future' time traveller to obtain his data.In the 2012 example, if 'you' came back to the 2004 'you' not to kill yourself, but to give a warning, assistance, or to add further 'warnings' to existing texts about past mistakes, then this would not change neither the past, present, or future, as the technology (and decoding key) available to read/view the 'encoded' texts will not be revealed or understood to scholars until they actually happen in the future (as the time traveller knew they would - as they are documented events of his history {from 2012}). In this case you would be able to return to your future start point with or without a personal time machine.(Based upon Mr Pegg's personal correspondence) I believe that the time line we were in as at 2001 was the second to last 'loop' of the 5000BC to 2002AD 'correction' cycle.
Each correction 'loop' can not go back prior to the previous 'correction 'loop' or it will erase whatever history has already occurred - in computing I think they call it nesting.Pegg's work provides us with the warning - 'Do not go back and change the past - visit it discretely - maybe make minor adjustments - but do not go back prior to the last back-step'. I personally do not know why or what the time traveller was thinking, and I do not know how to build a time machine. But this isn't the point of Mr Pegg's discoveries.
I am examining his claims and discussing the evidence presented - time travel seems to be the most prominent conclusion from the evidence. I can not think of anything else at the moment that would account for modern history and descriptions of images from particular cd-roms plus a computer system being documented in many, many, many ancient texts from all around the world and at different times.Asking me 'Why did Moses or John describe a cd-rom in one way and not another' is off topic.
If you want my opinion I will give it, but it will only be as relevant as yours, or anyone else. My opinion may not give the answers you feel you need to hear about Pegg's work - just as some of your questions, opinions, and off-topic 'comments' may not influence my beliefs. BUT my discussions on this forum to date plus the sharing of positive comments from various contributors have put some of Mr Pegg's research and methods into perspective for me - and given me several things to follow up, and to clarify.I like to keep things fairly simple. If someone says "extract the sequence of images from the world's various creation myths, then view the Ancients cd-rom, and tell me what you see", I would do this to try to prove them wrong (or to find out what the heck they are talking about).
But it would be a fair examination of the evidence based upon what is in front of me, and not what my, yours, or Pegg's opinion is.When I first sat in front of the Ancients cd-rom, with Genesis chapter 1 from the OT in my other hand, I was to check off the images from the screen as they appear to the words from the Bible - I was expecting maybe one or two "coincidences".
But just as the Bible (and creation myth generally) describes a particular sequence of images, these images appeared on the computer monitor before my eyes.I then did this same exercise with the Atlantis myth, then Daniel and Ezekiels beasts and temple measurements, etc., etc.
Pegg's says that these descriptions match to the images - they do.
His conclusion is that time travel is responsible. In his other works, he presents the rest of the evidence to support his claims and this conclusion.
Some of it checks out, some of it falls short.
Until I personally see a working time machine, I too will probably not be 100 percent convinced - and even then I may still never know 'Why a time traveller said or showed someone something'. Yes. I found this out when I read Mr Pegg's report on the NT. It contradicts what I was led to believe as a young boy at school. Even the perceived chronology that the Gospels are the first witnesses is incorrect.
It seems that the Roman person called Paul (Saul) {the one who was against the Christians} wrote over half of the NT.
Sounds like a Roman religious public relations book to me - to influence the Hebrews and the original Christians away from their basic beliefs.-- Other bits being investigated, or put into my 'outstanding' pile --

Hi Brad. A laptop is just one of several options that may have occurred.
A conventional 386 computer sent back, or did the ancient person get brought forward in time and see a modern 386 working ?
Or was a holographic projection of a 386 computer and its images get sent back ?
Ancient descriptions indicate a tower computer with a separate keyboard, monitor, speakers, and mouse attached by cables to sockets at the foundation of the CPU.
The power issue is still relevant, but I consider that if technology has advanced to a stage where time travel is possible, then something as 'simple' as a battery or power supply for a 386 boxed or laptop computer would not be a big deal.