Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
5 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 13/17 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   A modern object described in ancient texts negates Creation Myth
Eddy Pengelly
Inactive Member


Message 28 of 117 (113299)
06-07-2004 11:46 AM
Reply to: Message 22 by Edward Teller
06-06-2004 6:50 AM


No more posts please, Edward
You start off by giving us an example which is totally impossible for anyone to believe.
Yes, I agree that Edward jumped in without testing the water. He introduced concepts that have taken me five years to examine and affirm. He has also quoted my work without asking permission.
I will provide replies to your questions in a separate thread on his behalf.
I will also present Mr Pegg's reasons for not accepting the current translation of the Bible as true and correct.
In addition, later, I will also provide an introduction to Mr Pegg's discoveries that may be of benefit - by starting from the beginning - where Edward should have started.
Eddy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 22 by Edward Teller, posted 06-06-2004 6:50 AM Edward Teller has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 32 by Eddy Pengelly, posted 06-10-2004 2:25 AM Eddy Pengelly has not replied

  
Eddy Pengelly
Inactive Member


Message 32 of 117 (114089)
06-10-2004 2:25 AM
Reply to: Message 28 by Eddy Pengelly
06-07-2004 11:46 AM


Book - Roll - Wheel - DVD - Time Travel : Questions Answered
Here are replies to your questions as promised. (Written June 7 2004):
Why would they write everything in Hebrew or Greek and then use and English acronym DVD ? Doesn't make sense.
"DVD" is easier to say than 'digital versatile disk' and is written easier than CD-Rom, especially if you were trying to tell an ancient person the name of the item that we know as a small silver sided 'wheel'.
A time traveller (messenger - angel) told the ancient person (who either wrote the original text or related what he was told to someone else later). In Hebrew, DVD transliterates as the Hebrew characters for "dvd" (unable to reproduce them here), but when this was related to other people as a sound and then much later translated into Greek, then Latin, then Old English, then 'modern English', then American English, etc. etc., the vowel sounds of "a" and "i" were added.
It is the later vocalized translations of Hebrew and subsequent Greek interpretations of the letter sequence DVD into David that have covered over the acronym that was told to the ancient person.
A DVD that held less information than a 5 1/4" Double-sided (not even double-density) floppy disk ! ??
The digital versatile disk (called a cd-rom in the mid 1990s) Ancient Civilizations of the Mediterranean contains 132 sub-directory folders with a total of 2,398 files that use 351MB of disk space.
When this is 'set-up' to the hard-drive it places only 22 files in a folder it names 'Mediterr' and date stamps most files to 12:00:00AM.
In the default Windows 3.1 File Manager window, twelve of these files are visible on a 386/486 IBM PC with the mediterr.exe programme file having a data value of 143,442 kb.
When a 'property' request is done on this file, it gives 144K.
No. The DVD did not hold less than a 5 1/4" Double-sided floppy disk.
The data files placed on a Hard Drive at setup only take up 1.56MB.
The file that gets highlighted and clicked upon to make the book with seven seals "open" has 144K of data.
Why would the John writer, presumably ignorant of binary number systems and the idea of binary data storage, care to specify the byte size of a computer file?
How would he even understand what that meant? Why was he told this ?
John was being visited by a time traveller who was showing him the Ancients cd-rom on a computer for an important reason - but John was under the impression that this was one of God's angels, who had told him (as reported in Revelations 1:19) to "Write the things which thou hast seen..."
He saw the twelve lots of 12:00:00 but reports he was told the number 144 thousand in Revelations 7:4.
So he did what he was told - he wrote it down - even though he probably did not really comprehend what he was being shown.
The name of this book of the Bible itself answers why he was told this number.
"Revelations" has to do with disclosing, uncovering, or unveiling what previously was hidden, making known what had been secret.
John was told the numerical value of the highlighted file that made the 'sun-disk' (wheel) operate. This was significant, as the time traveller was explaining to John that previous Middle Eastern 'prophets' who viewed this cd-rom ended up with 'sun-disk/god' religions being formed due to their encounters.
John later reports in Revelations 13:9-18 that he was told which religious group was going to form the un-holy trinity religion, whose Mark had 666 verses and whose members were forced to worship the first beast (in the form of a Lamb. cf. Rev 13:11-12 and 14:1).
The time encounter with John of Patmos was one of a series of warnings to ancient people that religions had been formed due to misunderstandings about earlier encounters with time travellers.
Also, John was being told that the Romans were changing (going to change) the original Hebrew form of the "Jesus teachings" into their own version of 'Christianity' - and add extra words to verses to make their doctrines appear biblical.
How does he (Ron Pegg) know time travellers ran Windows 3.1, anyways? or Groliers?
Using the original ancient Hebrew meanings of the texts instead of the given Old English word meanings for the Bible, Ron Pegg has discovered that just like the DVD verse under discussion, other verses in the Bible describe Windows 3 and three specific cd-roms that were shown to ancient 'prophets' - one being the Grolier cd-rom. (Refer Mr Pegg's PaRDeS Booklet # 7. Too much to post here.)
Windows 3 Operating System described in the Bible
(extraction 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 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.
Why a 386 and Windows 3.1 ?
The minimum computer requirements needed to run and operate the Ancients cd-rom are a 386 CPU, MS Windows 3.11, MS-Dos 6, SVGA Monitor, an Audio Board, and a double-speed CD-ROM Drive.
It would not be necessary to take a Pentium 4 computer with all the modern features because it would not enhance the presentation in any way.
The saying "Less is Best" applies here.
A side issue that I have no way of investigating is "Was this technology used because time travel was perfected in the mid 1990s ?
Taking a Greek word, making a simplistic translation into English, and the looking into the etymology of the English translation does not sound like sound reasoning to me.
We are trying to discover the original word used and the meaning of that Greek word. It has been found that most often the modern English given translation that we know does not reflect that original intended meaning.
It is the Old English scribe's interpretation and translation of the original Hebrew and Greek words that have changed the meanings of the words. Translation into modern English has further compounded the problem.
Etymology tells us from where words originated, and in Strong's Concordance, it can be clearly seen that many of the given Old English words from the Bible do not even use the known root Greek or Hebrew meanings.
Mr Pegg asks the question "Why have the scribes used different meanings than the known root meanings" to which he suggests an answer "The scribes had a religious agenda, and as such made the verses say what they thought or were told to make them say".
When, as shown in the verse under discussion, the original root meanings of the Greek and Hebrew words are employed in place of the given religious interpretation, a new 'hidden' meaning is revealed.
I hope to post as a separate topic how and why Mr Pegg searches for the original meanings.
Ok, now that we've removed all this Greek to English to Latin = round : book/roll, where's the connotation of roundness ?
Revelations is written in Greek. Strong's Concordance provides us with the meanings of the Old English words used in the New Testament. Greek word referenced # 975 "book" means a roll, but has been written in the Bible as having four different interpretations - being either 'a bill, book, scroll, or writing'.
But the primary meaning is "roll" and not one of the interpretations.
However, 'roll' is an English word. So what did this English word mean back in John's time ?
In John's time they spoke Latin. An English dictionary tells us that the word 'roll' comes from Latin 'rota' meaning wheel.
So while we say roll, and John wrote the word roll in Greek (biblion), at that time, in Latin it would have been known as a "rota".
The 1611AD Old English translation of the Bible incorporated ideas and was partly derived from the Latin Vulgate Bible (among several others).
Therefore it can be seen that the Latin word rota (meaning wheel) has a language connection to the Greek word biblion that we now know in English as roll.
(See separate posting on Mr Pegg's methods and reasons.)
"Where's the connotation of roundness ?" - a wheel is round and it rolls !
How could the time traveller and John understand each other? I'm sure our understanding of the language used back then is a little off, so even if he took courses or something they couldn't communicate completely.
The Ancients cd-rom was produced in English, French, German, and Italian.
Latin was the language of ancient Rome. John was in a Roman prison.
It is my understanding that he probably understood Latin - so if the time traveller spoke Italian or even better, Latin, then this would sufficiently address this question.
So how'd the computer get back in John's time?
A Time Machine ! ?
I personally do not know, but Time Travel is the prime conclusion drawn from the volume of the available evidence presented by Mr Pegg.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 28 by Eddy Pengelly, posted 06-07-2004 11:46 AM Eddy Pengelly has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 33 by arachnophilia, posted 06-10-2004 4:31 AM Eddy Pengelly has not replied
 Message 34 by arachnophilia, posted 06-10-2004 4:35 AM Eddy Pengelly has not replied
 Message 35 by arachnophilia, posted 06-10-2004 9:32 AM Eddy Pengelly has not replied
 Message 39 by crashfrog, posted 06-10-2004 10:21 PM Eddy Pengelly has not replied

  
Eddy Pengelly
Inactive Member


Message 60 of 117 (114753)
06-12-2004 11:51 PM
Reply to: Message 57 by crashfrog
06-12-2004 6:41 PM


Outstanding replies
Hi, I am on holidays with my family.
I will get back to you later next week.
Regards, Eddy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 57 by crashfrog, posted 06-12-2004 6:41 PM crashfrog has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 69 by Eddy Pengelly, posted 06-16-2004 4:52 AM Eddy Pengelly has not replied

  
Eddy Pengelly
Inactive Member


Message 69 of 117 (115624)
06-16-2004 4:52 AM
Reply to: Message 60 by Eddy Pengelly
06-12-2004 11:51 PM


Re: Outstanding replies
DAVID: When the Hebrew letters DVD were later related to other people as sounds and then much later translated into Greek, then Latin, then Old English, the vowel sounds of "a" and "i" were added.
query -- However, the Greek WAS written with vowels, and revelation was originally written in Greek. The word being translated as the name David in revelation is DABID dabid with a b, not a v.
Yes, but, the use and context of the word David ('dabid' in Greek) directly refers to the Hebrew word #1732 David ('dvd' in Hebrew) in the biblical context. Although it is written and pronounced differently in the Greek language over a thousand years later, the David of the New Testament directly refers to the David of the Old Testament.
Thus it is not the Greek use of the word David that we are investigating, but the original Hebrew David*.
In the same way, the "book" with seven seals of the New Testament (Revelations 5:1-5) refers to the "book" that was sealed in the Old Testament (Isaiah 29:11; Daniel 12:4) and also seen by Ezekiel 2:9 "a roll of a book".
The New Testament gives the hint to look at the Hebrew meanings and context of the words (twice: "in the Hebrew tongue"; Revelations 9:11 and 16:16). So looking at a characteristic of this 'sealed book' we find that the Hebrew description by Ezekiel himself is that of it being a "roll".
So not only does the meaning in Strong's Concordance for Greek word "biblion' states 'roll', but an original Hebrew characteristic of it is a 'roll'. (H-word 4039 "roll".) For me to find out what 'roll' means, I refer to an English dictionary: "Roll" comes from the Latin 'rota' which meant "wheel". So what we now know as a roll was known as a wheel in Roman times.
What was the etymology of the word "book" associated with this roll as described by Ezekiel ?
H-word "book" 5612 comes from H-word 5608 which means 'to score with a mark as a record'.
What were the other characteristics of this book as cited in Revelations 5:1 ?
"..a book written within and on the backside, sealed with seven seals".
So we have the same book being described by two biblical writers, one Hebrew, one Greek, as: A roll that is written within and on the backside and sealed with seven seals; being a book scored with marks as a record.
The 1995 Ancients cd-rom by general definition is a digital versatile disk. It is round like a wheel. The disk has its information written within plastic layers, and is read from the back (as it rotates). The information is scored on to the plastic with marks and records the digital data.
This particular cd-rom as identified by Mr Pegg, has seven headings (icon/seals) that provide information - just as the biblical descriptions recount !
David in Hebrew is d-v-d. Perhaps you believe the ancient king himself* was really, say, a collection of davey and goliath on dvd?
In the Oxford Companion to the Bible (Metzger, Coogan, Oxford University Press, 1993), it is noted that David is "one of the best-known biblical characters" but is "a curiously elusive figure. The Bible tells of his carving out an empire unmatched in ancient Israel's history. Elsewhere, however, in historical records from near that period (tenth century BCE), he is not so much as mentioned".
*So as far as historical evidence shows, this 'David' character did not exist.
Then comes Mr Pegg's work that looks at the original word meanings. The evidence presented for his claims (in his works) show that descriptions from a particular cd-rom are noted in ancient texts.
In the general context of DVD meaning a digital versatile disk, a cd-rom that also contains video sequences can be called a dvd.
So, more or less - Yes - the many stories of the Bible (and from other ancient texts) including the David character are in fact describing characteristics and images from a modern cd-rom (dvd) - and when you really get into his work (which is available from the PPHC Study Group's web site), he presents further evidence that indicates the described given 'biblical history' refers to actual modern events, and not the ancient biblical history of which we have been led to believe (that is strangely not documented in any other sources of those times to support the Bible's claims).
If we are to apply pardes to Christian texts, as I think we should, let's focus on Remez and Drush at least. What you're attempting to do is squeeze something into a very literal, p'shat, reading of the text, and reassign words different meanings.
One example of finding the 'hidden' meanings in ancient texts has been presented to you on this forum. Please do not solely judge Mr Pegg's work on my personal attempt.
You say that I (by utilizing Mr Pegg's methods) am trying to assign different meanings to the Bible's words.
Mr Pegg points out that when many of the words in the Old English KJV Bible have their meanings and/or etymology checked to Strong's Concorndance, they do NOT use the given and known meaning, but one that is totally different yet appears to fit into the context of the rest of the given verse- and that when all the words are checked, they too have often been amended to fit in.
What Mr Pegg is doing in many cases is replacing the religious "given" meaning with the original stated Hebrew root meanings or the known use of the word during those ancient times - as he considers that just using the Old English religious scribe's best guessed words of about 2,840 years later does not represent the original message of the people who had encounters with the reported "messenger of god".
When I have checked some of what he says, most of it appears to be as he says.
But I agree with several people that there is a level at which you stop looking for other meanings. To this end, I will be carefully re-examining all of Mr Pegg's translations and seeing if they all are in fact 'correct' in citing the original Hebrew meanings and etymology.
This is one of the reasons I have set up the virtual PPHC Study Group and made Ronald Pegg's work available on the net.
My opinion that most of his work appears correct does not make it right - and other people's initial opinions that "it can't be true" doesn't make it wrong.
I have found that if a biblical prophet is describing a book that is written within and read from the back side, and has seven seals, there is no symbolism being used, but he is faithfully describing an object that is like a book, but written within and read from the back, and has seven seals that you need to pass before you access the information.
To date, religious opinion has provided no answers to this type of inquiry.
Mr Pegg on the other hand, although initially his claims are totally unexpected, has provided much evidence that shows what he declares is mostly correct - and the specific Ancients cd-rom DOES match these descriptions.
While Strong's Concordance is popular without a doubt - it is a source for beginners. No serious scholar/theologian would rely on Strong's as their primary source for Biblical word meanings.
Since the Bible's words were first written down, many different people from different countries with different agendas have "translated" and "interpreted" the Bible.
I do not have much confidence in the accuracy of a 'modern' Bible concordance that has been written by a particular group for their distinctive Bible that has been specifically produced for their version of religion.
By using that type of concordance, you will only find what the writers have decided the translations and interpretations mean - and not necessarily the original intent. This is also true for the KJV Bible in relation to some of the surface text 'dictionary meanings' as found in Strong's Concordance. It has already been pointed out that various 'religious' meanings given in the concordance do not use the root or known meanings. This in itself is reason enough for continued investigation.
The stories of the Bible, ie. the plain text translation of the Bible, is at a religious level - being what the priests wanted to say in order for their religion to keep control of the people. Mr Pegg cites the additions to 1John 5:7-8 in Jerome's Latin Bible, the 'Vulgate' as evidence for this claim.
Mr Pegg is utilizing the known decoding techniques of the Hebrews (PaRDeS) and Greeks (Green Language) to find the original meanings that have been covered over due to 'religious translations'. This includes using the Hebrew, Greek, and Latin original meanings of our 'modern' words (as outlined in a separate post) and tracing their etymology, as those meanings are closer to what was originally intended than what our words of 2,000 years later convey.
When the original meanings and contexts are revealed from the words of the KJV Bible using Strong's Concordance, a whole new set of unexpected descriptions are produced - the primeval messages.
Modern scholars and theologians are only finding the religious meanings of ancient words that have been placed as the given text, because they are using concordances written by similarly minded religious people. (It is like asking a group of politicians to hold a review into their own monetary matters to see if they should get a pay rise.)
Consider that what Mr Pegg is doing is not a 'language translation' as such, but a decoding of a code that was placed in the Bible by people from the future. (Unlike Dr Rip's E.L.S. 'letter code', this code is at the 'word' level.)
The key to that code is the etymology contained in Strong's Concordance.
Biblion tended to mean "scroll" at the time, because the bound book hadn't been invented yet. However, scrolls are cylindrical. If I were talking about a flat disc, especially one that SPINS I would use something like "kuklos" and maybe modified by "helissio".
A 'flat disk that spins' has been documented in many ancient cultures.
The Sumerian earth goddess, Inanna, acquired the Tablet of Destiny. Ashur, an associated chief deity had as his emblem a winged disk.
In Egypt at Elephantine, the creator god Khnum utilized a potter’s wheel. This type of potter's wheel is also mentioned in Jeremiah 18:3 (where H-word 70 "wheels" is 'oben' in Hebrew; and according to Mr Pegg's research relates to the 'Ben-Ben' stone of Egypt).
Ganesha was the Indian Hindu god of wisdom, and was also known as Chakra-Raja (Lord of the Wheel). He held the Chakra (wheel), and his mount was a mouse. Vishnu also held a wheel (the sun disk).
The Celtic Arianrhod was an ancient earth goddess, and was known as the ‘silver wheel’.
I Ching is an ancient system of Chinese wisdom, and this oracle is symbolized as two circles within a larger circle which have been drawn to give the illusion that they are revolving.
In the mid 1500s it was reported by the Queen of France that Nostradamus also utilized magic circles and a magic mirror. He depicted these 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. (note: one is the same name as that from the ancient Sumerian story.)
The Greeks themselves have depicted a map of the known world as being round and flat, with an image of the Mediterranean region thereon.
Mr Pegg has discovered that all these descriptions refer to the Ancients cd-rom being seen by those ancient peoples, and that the Greek map is an attempt to drawn the Map Page from the cd-rom within the shape of the disk itself.
On the PPHC Study Group web site is a picture of an old Bible that has also depicted the impression of the cd-rom including its central hole over the image of the introduction's Sea and Sky Page from the Ancients cd-rom.
(See Windows 3 post for replies to PC 386 and Time Travel)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 60 by Eddy Pengelly, posted 06-12-2004 11:51 PM Eddy Pengelly has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 70 by arachnophilia, posted 06-16-2004 8:22 AM Eddy Pengelly has replied

  
Eddy Pengelly
Inactive Member


Message 71 of 117 (115964)
06-17-2004 4:34 AM
Reply to: Message 70 by arachnophilia
06-16-2004 8:22 AM


Final replies for this thread
So not only does the meaning in Strong's Concordance for Greek word "biblion' states 'roll', but an original Hebrew characteristic of it is a 'roll'. (H-word 4039 "roll".)
Reply -- yeah, only it means "writing" which was usually on a scroll, yes.
No. I have to emphatically correct you on this one.
H-word 4039 "roll" comes from H-word 1556 which is a primitive root word meaning 'to roll'. (ie. to move around or rotate)
So it does NOT mean 'writing' as you say, but comes from an Hebrew verb that means 'to roll'.
We may have to agree to disagree on the Latin reference to "rota', but the Hebrew use of "roll" predates both the Latin and Greek, therefore the oldest terminology is the correct context - to roll, a verb - from which the Hebrew word 4039 "roll" was derived.
This means that the specific book described by Ezekiel had this characteristic - it rolled (or as the later Romans would say, it ROTAted).
What were the other characteristics of this book as cited in Revelations 5:1 ?
"..a book written within and on the backside, sealed with seven seals".
Reply -- check strong's. esothen, "within" means "from the soul."
ophisten, "on the backside" seems to indicate that it was written after it was sealed. check strongs.
Again, I have to emphatically correct you. "from the soul"* does not appear in Strong's in reference to the "within" of Revelations 5:1.
Greek word "within" # 2081 means 'from inside' but comes from G-word #2080 which means 'inside', but this word comes from G-word #1519 which is a primary preposition meaning 'to' or 'into (indicating the point reached or entered)'.
G-word 3693 "backside" in the context of word 3700 with enclitic of source, means 'from the rear (as a secure aspect)'.
G-word 3700 means 'to gaze (with wide eyes, as at something remarkable)'.
So this specific "book" to which John was referring, had its contents securely written from the inside and from the rear, and the context of him seeing and describing this "book" made him wide eyed with amazement.
Would a normal scroll evoke this type of reaction ?
I think not, but I believe a cd-rom would.
* a reference to 'soul' is mentioned as a 2(a) notation in later religious electronic versions of Strongs, but this is not the original primary meaning as found in the 1984 printed edition - where soul is not mentioned.
ie. It is a later religious interpretation added to try to affirm the religious belief in souls.
otherwise the symbolic meanings of revelation would jump out, almost immediately.
There is a level of symbolism pertaining to the books of Moses, Daniel, Ezekiel, and Revelations (for example), but this symbolism has been created over a period of 3,000 years by the various religions that have perceived the descriptions in these books to be about something they could not understand, and have therefore covered over the original messages.
The original Hebrew meanings, and not the given religious scribes best guess, but the root and known Hebrew and Greek word meanings in the proper context of their etymology provide a different account to that which we have been told.
The above mentioned 'prophets' have done what they were told by "the messenger" - written down what they were told and what they saw.
The original Hebrew and Greek words used by these ancient people describe a set of images and sequence of images that exactly match to those seen when the 1995 Ancients cd-rom is viewed.
I hope you will check this out more thoroughly than you did with the Strong's examples.
There is a lot more that needs to be investigated. Let's move on.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 70 by arachnophilia, posted 06-16-2004 8:22 AM arachnophilia has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 72 by One_Charred_Wing, posted 06-19-2004 11:41 PM Eddy Pengelly has replied

  
Eddy Pengelly
Inactive Member


Message 74 of 117 (116803)
06-20-2004 1:04 AM
Reply to: Message 72 by One_Charred_Wing
06-19-2004 11:41 PM


Look, if the computer's stuff was in English, how did John understand it? How did the two of them communicate when the time traveller probably didn't speak the same language as John?
Jar has half answered your questions.
The referenced CD-Rom was available in several languages, German, English, French, and ITALIAN.
The Italian language is the language of Rome. John (of Revelations) was held in a Roman jail. Romans of that era spoke Latin. Scribes of the day were knowledgable people.
I personally wasn't there, and do not have information pertaining to whether the time traveller spoke Latin/Italian or not, nor whether he was shown the Italian version of the cd-rom. If he did, and he was, then this would provide a conclusive answer to your question.
He may not have understood the language, but was able to describe the 'sea of glass' and the 'four specific beats' that he viewed.
Did John understand the English numerals he saw on the Windows 3 File Manager ?
I agree with you - probably not.
But I base my answer on some evidence, and not just my opinion.
In Revelations 7:4 John states that he was told the number "I heard the number of those who were sealed", so I believe he did not understand English - or else he would have said "I saw the number of them".
Wouldn't that create a time paradox? Has it already?
Sort of.Yes. All these specific visits to the past caused a reaffirmation of the religious concepts that a time traveller was deemed to be 'a messenger from God' and therefore ancient people took the religious interpretation of his words rather than the historical messages he was trying to deliver.
So why did he go back in time again?
To tell each new (chronologically advanced) group of people he visited that the previous group 'got it wrong'. He repeated his messages and warnings, but already having a mind-set that only an angel of god could appear in a bright light and tell them about the future, they continued their religious conceptions.
You will find Mr Pegg's understanding for this in the "Different Attempts to Correct the Mistake" section on the "Pegg's Commentary" page of the SEMINARS menu item from the Member Area of the web site http://www.pphcstudygroup.org.au
There's still the question of HOW DO PEOPLE TRAVEL BACK IN TIME?!
I personally do not know how to build a time machine, or know all the science stuff needed to do so, but just because of my limited knowledge on this, it does not disprove that a someone else with the knowledge may have made a time machine operational - and used it.
Let's look at your logic.
You seem to be dismissing Mr Pegg's discoveries because you personally do not know how a time machine could work.
As an analogy, I could therefore state (using your logic) that motor vehicles could not exist or work.
Let's say I do not know how to build a motor vehicle or know enough about the electronics needed to make one work. So basing an entire judgement on my own limited perceptions, the idea of a motor vehicle is outrageous to me.
But they do exist, even though I do not know or comprehend how to make one.
I can even drive and operate a motor vehicle, even though I personally could not make one.
Mr Pegg's work is not studying time travel, it is examining the volume of written evidence from many of the world's ancient texts that describe images and sequences of images from modern objects - being a computer system and specific cd-roms. You can view this visual evidence from the Member Area of the PPHC-SG website.
Many people have viewed the evidence and have agreed that 'time trave' is a possible conclusion.
If I were to cross the street and get run over, maybe I would have to consider the possibility that it was due to a motor vehicle - or would I just be imagining my injuries.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 72 by One_Charred_Wing, posted 06-19-2004 11:41 PM One_Charred_Wing has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 75 by crashfrog, posted 06-20-2004 1:21 AM Eddy Pengelly has replied
 Message 76 by One_Charred_Wing, posted 06-20-2004 1:57 AM Eddy Pengelly has replied
 Message 85 by sidelined, posted 06-20-2004 12:23 PM Eddy Pengelly has not replied

  
Eddy Pengelly
Inactive Member


Message 77 of 117 (116820)
06-20-2004 2:41 AM
Reply to: Message 75 by crashfrog
06-20-2004 1:21 AM


To tell each new (chronologically advanced) group of people he visited that the previous group 'got it wrong'.
query -- Why wouldn't he just go back in time and tell himself not to have left at all?
If the first time travel encounter that caused the religons to form was deleted from history, then no religions would form, thus no religious societies, means no civilization as we now know it.
They had to CORRECT the error(s), not erase the consequences - being our current civilization.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 75 by crashfrog, posted 06-20-2004 1:21 AM crashfrog has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 82 by crashfrog, posted 06-20-2004 5:09 AM Eddy Pengelly has replied
 Message 84 by jar, posted 06-20-2004 11:13 AM Eddy Pengelly has not replied

  
Eddy Pengelly
Inactive Member


Message 78 of 117 (116823)
06-20-2004 3:35 AM
Reply to: Message 76 by One_Charred_Wing
06-20-2004 1:57 AM


If after reading something from the Bible in 2020 somebody decides to go back and meet the author, and winds up adding a new text to the present day Bible he originally read, wouldn't that change the way it was published so he'd already seen the new text that he created?
Yes. That's why the existing texts can not (should not) be changed by time travel. What has happened due to past encounters can not be changed without erasing our present. The way Mr Pegg explains it, shows that warnings about the past mistakes are given so that the 'present' people can make the changes. In this way our "history" will remain the same.
If somebody goes back in time and separates his mother and father from each other, wouldn't he logically cease to exist? If so, then how could he have been born to go back in time and separate them? That's about where most people's brains explode.
He would not cease to exist because he is physically here (- there, at the 'earlier' time when he separated his parents). He will influence the "new" future (because it is yet to happen) because he will still be himself (at the age he is when he time travelled and arrived at the 'earlier' time) and becomes part of that new history - he just won't have a historical past in that 'earlier' time . And he will not change the 'original history' because that is from where he came. But where that 'original' history goes when his influences changes the first time line is where my brain starts to go into overload.
In another thread when somebody asked why he brought such a junk computer back with him, you said we couldn't really guess a time traveller's motives. So, how do we know that's what he was doing, with that in mind?
No, no.no.no.no - clarify !
The question was specifically Why the particular 386 PC computer taken back in time (for the many reasons given by several people).
I said I personally do not know.
Another question of "Why time travel back to ancient people" is a separate issue.
Mr Pegg has given his conclusions - To tell each new (chronologically advanced) group of people he visited that the previous group 'got it wrong'.
But just because you can make the text sound like it's describing something similar to these objects doesn't mean it is, and it certainly doesn't say with any solid merit that a time traveller must have brought those specific objects back to that era nor does it say anything about his or her motives.
Exactly. This is why I have placed Mr Pegg's written and visual research documentation and slide shows on the PPHC-SG website, and brought some of his claims to this forum.
I want to get to the bottom of his claims just like everyone else.
His evidence needs to be examined piece by piece, and the assumptions sifted out from the solid conclusions.
Many people have viewed the evidence and have agreed that 'time trave' is a possible conclusion.
reply -- Possible around the likelyhood of .0012% maybe
Since May 5 2004 over 2,900 people have visited the PPHC-SG web site. Of these about 20 people have indicated in their opinion "the possibility" of time travel being involved.
That's actually .06 percent, not the .0012 you say. LOL
OK, so I should not have used the bandwagon approach, plus the web site has only been opened for a month or so, it is early days - sorry, it was late and I was tired.
"If I were to cross the street and get run over."
comment -- What does this have to do with time travel or this theory?
A sloppy analogy on my behalf, sorry.
The overall point I was making concerns a person's own lack of technological understanding of how something is made or works does not in itself exclude the possibility that the device is real or could be made.
I was loosely basing my comments on an incident concerning a New Guinea tribe who encountered Europeans with guns for the first time.
Not knowing that they were being threatened with death, they walked up and looked down the barrels of the guns.
In my analogy, not knowing what a motor vehicle was (or ignoring its existence), would not stop me getting hurt.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 76 by One_Charred_Wing, posted 06-20-2004 1:57 AM One_Charred_Wing has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 91 by One_Charred_Wing, posted 06-21-2004 12:21 AM Eddy Pengelly has replied

  
Eddy Pengelly
Inactive Member


Message 80 of 117 (116825)
06-20-2004 3:49 AM
Reply to: Message 79 by sidelined
06-20-2004 3:37 AM


It is no joke.
An Australian researcher claims that he has evidence of modern objects being described in ancient texts and artworks.
This forum has been discussing some of the interesting claims made in relation to this.
You will find information about these claims on the PPHC Study Group web site.
Whether it is true or not is yet to be determined.
Examine the visual evidence for yourself and come to your own conclusions.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 79 by sidelined, posted 06-20-2004 3:37 AM sidelined has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 81 by pink sasquatch, posted 06-20-2004 4:04 AM Eddy Pengelly has replied

  
Eddy Pengelly
Inactive Member


Message 92 of 117 (117051)
06-21-2004 8:35 AM
Reply to: Message 81 by pink sasquatch
06-20-2004 4:04 AM


pink sasquatch writes:
Is there a reason why the hypothesis is time travel to the past, as opposed to prophecy, which would seem to make sense in Biblical perspective and still allow the inclusion of modern objects?
Yes. Michael Drosnin in his Bible Code 2 book mentions 'time travel will come in every time' or something similar. (I'm going on memory here.)
This in itself is not conclusive, but is just another piece of the puzzle that throws the scales towards time travel.
Discovering modern objects described in ancient texts can draw several assumptions:
(1) Time Travel back to the past and the ancient people personally viewed the cd-roms on a computer taken back by the time traveller, and told* exact historical information.
(2) Time Travel back to the past as a holograph (or whatever) and shown and told* the above - support for this is that several 'prophets' report the 'angel of God' (image of time person) in a bright light above the ground.
(3) The ancient person being 'brought forward' to a future time and shown the cd-rom on a PC 386 (- PC 386 may indicate a mid 1990s time ??) and told* of future events. - support for this is their reports of 'being in a dream state' or similar.
(4)"Prophesy" as you may define it.
(5)Given "Prophesy". Using the early time travel techniques cited in Jenny Randles' book "Time Storms" - a future people send back to particular 'prophets' information about certain 'future' events. eg. Daniel, Ezekiel, Nostradamus. - this is not 'prophesy' but given information of the future.
* The E.L.S. Code is encoded in the Torah itself.
Events from the 1991 Persian Gulf War and the following Exodus into Turkey, plus the astronomical and historical events of the ten people working on the Bible Code appear in; a) the plain surface text; b) the etymological level of language (using Strong's Concordance as the decoding key; and c) specifically 'hidden and encode' data pertaining to one year of PGW events in the Book of Kings, plus 'hidden' numerical data in Judges and others.
Any one of these scenarios in itself could be the answer.
But I believe that it was a combination of them, after the first 'mistake' was made, the Torah (containing the 'hidden and encoded data, ie. E.L.S. code) was sent back, but the 'dream' prophets may have obtained their information in one of the mentioned ways, while other stories in the ancient texts that appear to reflect these things may be just the locals re-telling the story told to them - in which that person did not personally have a time encounter.
This is starting to get way off topic for this forum.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 81 by pink sasquatch, posted 06-20-2004 4:04 AM pink sasquatch has not replied

  
Eddy Pengelly
Inactive Member


Message 93 of 117 (117055)
06-21-2004 8:49 AM
Reply to: Message 82 by crashfrog
06-20-2004 5:09 AM


If the first time travel encounter that caused the religons to form was deleted from history, then no religions would form, thus no religious societies, means no civilization as we now know it.
query -- Then how did the first iteration of civilization happen, I mean, the one that led to time travel?
also -- But you've got the consequences - a time-travel-capable civilization - occuring before the action - the time-trip in question.
We are still in that "civilization' because they are CORRECTING the mistakes, and not erasing them.
Our society IS the consequence. It has occurred because once Mr Pegg's discoveries are found to be mostly correct, it will be realized that time Travel HAS happened, and that someone, sometime, IS going to master the science and make a time machine - during which the first trip will cause the initial 'mistake'.
But we are still here to know about it because of the correcting philosophy and not the 'go back to the day before' concept.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 82 by crashfrog, posted 06-20-2004 5:09 AM crashfrog has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 94 by crashfrog, posted 06-21-2004 8:55 AM Eddy Pengelly has replied

  
Eddy Pengelly
Inactive Member


Message 95 of 117 (117058)
06-21-2004 9:02 AM
Reply to: Message 88 by Melchior
06-20-2004 1:13 PM


In case anyone has actually used the program in question; would the content be understandable by someone ~2000 years ago without the basic education of our time?
This has been discussed before. Simple answer - no, not really.
They would recognize some of the imagery, but probably not understand the words and speech.
BUT remember, most of the 'prophets' say that they were told to write down what they were told and what they saw.
From their perspective, an angel of God (a time traveller) has told them to do something - so they did it to the best of their understanding.
When you view the Ancients cd-rom using their level of understanding, this being the source of the Bible and other ancient texts that report the creation story is plainly seen, as is the events from the 1991 Persian Gulf War when the Grolier cd-rom is viewed.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 88 by Melchior, posted 06-20-2004 1:13 PM Melchior has not replied

  
Eddy Pengelly
Inactive Member


Message 96 of 117 (117075)
06-21-2004 10:23 AM
Reply to: Message 91 by One_Charred_Wing
06-21-2004 12:21 AM


But, what makes you think he went to tell them that they 'got it wrong'? Why would he try to tell them that by showing them a strange object that projects strange images... and to an apostle of Jesus of all people?
The 'time people' kept making the same mistake of showing the next chronological set of people what caused the previous misunderstanding, being the cd-roms and its strange images of the future - until they changed strategy to encode 'hidden' messages in the ancient texts that would be found in 1958 and 1998 - a non-religious approach
The Hebrew priests consulted an Oracle in the Jerusalem Temple. Mr Pegg's discoveries identify this "oracle" as a computer system, with the two "tables" being the cd-roms Ancients and Grolier.
Many other 'prophets' had an encounter with a time traveller including Daniel, Ezekiel, and Muhammed and Smith.
As far as the evidence goes, Jesus, like Matthew, viewed the 'oracle' in the Jerusalem Temple. This is from where Matthew and others obtained their Gospel descriptions.
It is reported that Jesus "turned the tables' in the Temple - meaning he turned the cd-roms on the oracle apparatus.
The version of Christianity (Judaism ?) that Jesus was teaching was side-tracked by the Gospels' versions of events written up 40 to 90 years later in the Greek New Testament, and later further changed by the Roman Empire, and then also by the subsequent Holy Roman Church - which created the 'trinity' concept etc.
One specific reverent warning by John is in Revelations 13:18 where he warns about this anti-christ religious trinity faith (the Lamb beast) that was written by Mark, whose number of verses was originally 666.
It has been found that twelve verses have been added to Marks Gospel (678 - 12 = 666) - but that is another story.
The overall warning by the time traveller is a general one that tells of all the prophets who viewed the oracle in their various temples (the cd-roms on a computer) whether with a time encounter or just retelling the stories about a previous encounter, have taken it to be a 'religious experience with an angel of God', rather than an "oops, we stuffed up" from a future time traveller.
Mr Pegg translated Genesis 1:1-6 and found the specific warning to which you refer.
He converted the Old English religious translations back into the original Hebrew context and meanings, and found:
Genesis 1:1-6 writes:
The first of a sequence; gods created; (next) a sky with clouds; (next) a part of earth.
The part of the earth was concealed; A desolate empty darkness after the surface of the main sea.
The breathing-spirit of the gods to sit over the face of the water to challenge and cast down the gods.
Knowledge to exist there.
Following the gods a sun to appear there. That sun to succeed the gods.
From selecting the sun, a secret place.
Religious leaders and messengers to call upon the hot sun in ignorance. They to preach to distort the knowledge to meddle with and cover up the original words following the dawning of the first Sun.
The gods commune and sink there: the two sections of the visible sky and water: to exist and remain to divide the water from the water.
Here is the warning and reason decoded from Genesis 1:5
Religious leaders and messengers to call upon the hot sun in ignorance. They to preach to distort the knowledge to meddle with and cover up the original words following the dawning of the first Sun.
The Ancients cd-rom has on its cover what looks like the face of the Sun God - and this is why the Sun god was worshipped in the ancient Middle East and then Egypt.
The Sun = the 'start' icon that take you to the information (the secret place).
The recognizable "Creation" sequence = the start up sequence from the cd-rom to its Map Page (the secret place).
Enough said on this here.I have submitted a topic pertaining to Genesis 1:1-6 in new proposals.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 91 by One_Charred_Wing, posted 06-21-2004 12:21 AM One_Charred_Wing has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 100 by One_Charred_Wing, posted 06-29-2004 6:08 PM Eddy Pengelly has replied

  
Eddy Pengelly
Inactive Member


Message 97 of 117 (117076)
06-21-2004 10:32 AM
Reply to: Message 94 by crashfrog
06-21-2004 8:55 AM


Remember the 1990s level of computer technology - maybe time travel has already happened - and the cycle begun, but we have not been told or know about it.
The discovery of the E.L.S Bible Code between 1958 and when it was publicized in 1997 (as Mr Pegg says) was to alert the world to this situation.
But the fact that the Bible is something else other than just a religious book did not have the desired effect at that time.
More seriously, what happens if someone else builds a time machine and wants to break the cycle.
Maybe that is why the Mayan calander ends in 2012 !

This message is a reply to:
 Message 94 by crashfrog, posted 06-21-2004 8:55 AM crashfrog has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 98 by crashfrog, posted 06-21-2004 9:27 PM Eddy Pengelly has not replied
 Message 99 by arachnophilia, posted 06-27-2004 5:37 PM Eddy Pengelly has not replied

  
Eddy Pengelly
Inactive Member


Message 109 of 117 (120813)
07-01-2004 12:32 PM
Reply to: Message 100 by One_Charred_Wing
06-29-2004 6:08 PM


Born2Preach writes:
Show them {ancient people} something that would cause the description to be so blatantly obvious that ANYBODY of 2004 would see it.
Please don't shoot me, I am only presenting you the evidence of which you ask, as written by Mr Pegg. (extraction used with permission)
Mr Pegg writes:
Plagues of War.
The Old Testament (ca.1230 BC) religious story is about the ten plagues that occur in Egypt as a result of the Pharaoh not letting the people go.
The location of Egypt in biblical times included all of the countries of the Egyptian Empire that stretched from the river Nile across to the Euphrates river. This included the two countries of Iraq and Kuwait. So literally, the Pharaoh was the leader of (what is now) Iraq and Kuwait.
In August 1990 the leader of Iraq, President Saddam Hussein, invaded and annexed the country of Kuwait and would not let it go.
The religious stories in Exodus about the plagues of Egypt are in fact descriptions of the various events from the Persian Gulf War that are explained in associated literal terms at the level of understanding of the ancient writers of the Old Testament.
(ie. How would you describe a squadron of aircraft that swarm and fly in the sky like birds; or ships of the sea that come onto land like a frog ?)
The plague of;
Blood refers to the bloodshed of the war.
Frogs refers to the amphibious assault craft that came ashore from the Coalition ships in the Persian Gulf.
Lice refers to the military tanks of the ground forces. (It is also a visual description {of the tank battle from the (I)Grolier(/I) cd-rom}.)
Swarm of flies (and hornets Deuteronomy 7:20) refer to the F/A-18C Hornet aircraft that flew over Iraq.
Livestock refers to all the related Iraqi military vehicles (that were destroyed on the Baghdad highway).
Boils refers to ‘fire burns’, and the irritations due to the PGW Syndrome (ie. from Iraqi chemical weapons).
Hail refers to the falling bombs from the F-117A Stealth fighters and other Coalition bombers.
Locusts refer to the swarming of Coalition ground force troops (and tanks) from February 24 1991.
Darkness refers to the black oil smoke from the 732 oil fires set by retreating Iraqi troops in Kuwait.
Firstborn refers to the Kurdish Muslim population of Iraq that were then attacked by the Iraqi troops.
(The descendants of the ‘firstborn’ child of Abraham, Ishmael, became the Muslims.)
- - - - - - -
The locusts of Revelations 9:3 are fully described in 9:7-10, 17;
And the shapes of the locusts were like unto horses prepared unto battle; and on their heads were as it were crowns like gold, and their faces were as the faces of menAnd they had breastplates, as it were breastplates of iron; and the sound of their wings was as the sound of chariots of many horses running to battle. And they had tails like unto scorpions, and there were stings in their tailsand out of their mouths issued fire and smoke and brimstone.
Locusts = military tanks that are armoured (iron breastplates), have a crew (faces of men), that have a lot of horse-power and make a loud engine noise (sound of chariots), fire a projectile (in an issue of fire and smoke) from the front cannon, and fires bullets from the rear machine gun (stings from its tail).
It is reported that Jesus "turned the tables' in the Temple - meaning he turned the cd-roms on the oracle apparatus.
I have checked the Greek section of Strong's Concordance for Matthew 21:12 and Mark 11:15 and have not found any etymological associations to support this claim using the Greek language.
But, using the ancient Green language decoding techniques such as Homonyms (that were first used by the Greeks) and taking into account that (as far as Mr Pegg is concerned) a computer system and the cd-roms were used in the Jerusalem Temple (before being taken to Rome in 70AD), I can see how "turning the tables" can represent a cd-rom turning when the Hebrew etymology for these words is used, instead of the Greek words and interpretations of 1,230 years later.
cf. Exodus 31:18 - "two tables of testimony, tables of stone", where "tables (3871)" = a polished tablet or plate {referring to a glistening plate}.
What type of glistening polished plate was in the ark (box) of the covenent ?
H-word 1285 "covenant" means 'a compact' !
The version of Christianity (Judaism ?) that Jesus was teaching was side-tracked by the Gospels' versions of events written up 40 to 90 years later in the Greek New Testament, and later further changed by the Roman Empire, and then also by the subsequent Holy Roman Church - which created the 'trinity' concept etc.
query -- I don't see what this has to do with the topic we're discussing.
This forum is about errors in the Bible's interpretations.
I was trying to pint out that even in the first century AD (as John of Revelations was also warning) the Roman 'system' was not only changing religious perceptions (of Judaism), but also the meanings of the words from the Old Testament to reflect their 'new' ideas about religion - a 'son of god' and a 'mother of god' for example.
They also changed and added some words to the Greek NT writings, and thus we have the beginning of the "covering over" of the original Hebrew (and some Greek) meanings by the religious scribes who wrote the 'Vulgate'.
Sorry, I did not express myself too well on this one.
Arachnophilia writes:
A lot of hebrew words in the OT come from other languages. they borrowed alot. why are no words from english, if a time traveller showed all of these people things from an english cd-rom? how come there are no hebrew-izations of words like "cd-rom" "computer" "disk" etc? does this or anything similar appear anywhere in the bible?
The cd-rom was available in several languages, German, English, French, and Italian.
A very good question - but hebrew-ization words may be in any one of these languages.
I will add this to the list of investigations I intend to do. Thanks.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 100 by One_Charred_Wing, posted 06-29-2004 6:08 PM One_Charred_Wing has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 110 by One_Charred_Wing, posted 07-01-2004 9:20 PM Eddy Pengelly has replied
 Message 111 by arachnophilia, posted 07-01-2004 10:08 PM Eddy Pengelly has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024