Michael's Thread

[FoxyKeys]

Originally Posted by michaelr

Hi Beth,

Welcome.

I am not quite certain that I know what you mean by the "A" and "THE". In terms of gematria, yes, these words are important.

e.g. "KEY" = 246, while "THE KEY" = 444.
"CROWN"= 438 while "A CROWN" = 444

The words are also important in terms of their equivalents in other languages.

Does that help, or have I totally misunderstood you?

M

Michaelr,

No, you haven't. I'm just an intuitive thinker, is all. Just trying to follow you.

Have you read the book Sacred Geometry by Stephen Skinner or Math for Mystics by Renna Shesso? Both very interesting.

Actually, my library has become massive...but my hunger to learn can no longer match my pocket book these days. I will continue to read your ideas. Fascinating! Thanks.

Your friend,
Beth

[michaelr]

Originally Posted by FoxyKeys

Michaelr,

No, you haven't. I'm just an intuitive thinker, is all. Just trying to follow you.

Have you read the book Sacred Geometry by Stephen Skinner or Math for Mystics by Renna Shesso? Both very interesting.

Actually, my library has become massive...but my hunger to learn can no longer match my pocket book these days. I will continue to read your ideas. Fascinating! Thanks.

Your friend,
Beth

Beth,

I know I have looked at Math for Mystics, and the cover of Sacred Geometry looks familiar too, but cannot remember where or when I saw it.

M

[APPRENTICE]

[quote=michaelr;467427]

Originally Posted by APPRENTICE


.

The choice of terms "coincidence of opposites" vs. "unification of opposites" is an important one. True opposites can never be unified (e.g. matter/antimatter, true order/true disorder etc.). The reason true opposites can never be unified despite the fact that it seems that opposites are unified all the time is due to perception.

Perceived Opposites become perceived as being unified at the moment that it is realized (consciously or not) that they were never true opposites to begin with. Hence all perceived unification's of opposites are instead functional realizations of a lack of true polarity to begin with, even if the realization is never recognized as such and the fantasy of true opposites becoming truly united is perceived instead.

The polarized and categorized nature of human perception is responsible for the illusion that nature has a high concentration of opposites to unify. In truth the true amount of true opposites that exist outside of human perception is well under 1%. Yet nature is so efficient it still makes positive use of this sub=1% as it's primary source of initial creation process, A.K.A "the prima materia".[/QUOTE

APP,

Could you provide the justification for these statements?

What is your criterion for distinguishing between "true opposites" and "perceived opposites"?

How can tell if true opposites exist outside of human perception? Is not the perception that true opposites exist outside of perception, itself a perception?

M

There are many criterion for distinguishing between true vs. perceived opposites. First of all there is the argument I presented in the above post, namely that true opposites can never be unified whereas perceived opposites can always be unified as they were never really opposites to begin with. The two can therefore be distinguished by observation of results.

If matter and antimatter are combined they annihilate each other (a result confirmed in laboratories). If a boulder sized piece of matter was attempted to be "unified" with an equal amount of anti-matter the resulting explosion would destroy a planet. Explain how that could be classified as perceptional. On the other hand if false polar opposites like space and time as they were perceived before 1900 (with space being thought of as fundamentally static and time as fundamentally non-static) are "unified" it simply means that they are now correctly understood as not being true fundamental opposites (i.e. space is now known to not be static). So strong is the ignorance of this concept that Einstein ignored his equations which mandated a non-static space and came up with a ludicrous theory to balance his equations which he latter called the greatest blunder of his life.

Your statement that, "How can you tell if true opposites exist outside of human perception? Is not the perception that true opposites exist outside of perception, itself a perception?", would be dependant on a belief that absolute truth has no existence. Absolute truth would by definition be independent of human perception and therefore truths could and would exist independent of human perception. You could argue that because absolute truth has not been proven that it is a perception, but by extension you would in turn be doing the net equivalent of arguing against absolute truth itself. Are you willing to deny the existence of absolute truth? Absolute truth is such a deep concept it is better categorized as a belief than a perception.

This is precisely and exactly the reason I carefully use the word "true" (as in true vs. false disorder) in deep matters. The "true" implies a truth independent and beyond human perception, which in turn is based on the belief of an absolute truth.

[michaelr]

Originally Posted by APPRENTICE

[

There are many criterion for distinguishing between true vs. perceived opposites. First of all there is the argument I presented in the above post, namely that true opposites can never be unified whereas perceived opposites can always be unified as they were never really opposites to begin with. The two can therefore be distinguished by observation of results.

If matter and antimatter are combined they annihilate each other (a result confirmed in laboratories). If a boulder sized piece of matter was attempted to be "unified" with an equal amount of anti-matter the resulting explosion would destroy a planet. Explain how that could be classified as perceptional. On the other hand if false polar opposites like space and time as they were perceived before 1900 (with space being thought of as fundamentally static and time as fundamentally non-static) are "unified" it simply means that they are now correctly understood as not being true fundamental opposites (i.e. space is now known to not be static). So strong is the ignorance of this concept that Einstein ignored his equations which mandated a non-static space and came up with a ludicrous theory to balance his equations which he latter called the greatest blunder of his life.

Your statement that, "How can you tell if true opposites exist outside of human perception? Is not the perception that true opposites exist outside of perception, itself a perception?", would be dependant on a belief that absolute truth has no existence. Absolute truth would by definition be independent of human perception and therefore truths could and would exist independent of human perception. You could argue that because absolute truth has not been proven that it is a perception, but by extension you would in turn be doing the net equivalent of arguing against absolute truth itself. Are you willing to deny the existence of absolute truth? Absolute truth is such a deep concept it is better categorized as a belief than a perception.

This is precisely and exactly the reason I carefully use the word "true" (as in true vs. false disorder) in deep matters. The "true" implies a truth independent and beyond human perception, which in turn is based on the belief of an absolute truth.

APP,

Thanky you for your reply.

With respect to your first paragraph, it is, from my point of view, a classic example of the logical flaw of "begging the question". You are only stating in another way, what you have you assumed to be true in the first place, and then calling it a argument in support of your conclusion.

With respect to your second paragraph , the classification of something as belonging to the category of "matter" or "anti-matter" is a product of perception. Without perception, the categories of " matter" and " anti-matter" would not exist. Alfred Korzybyski calls such a error of reasoning "mistaking the map for the territory". An internal mental category has been mistakingly taken for the "thing itself".

With respect to your third paragraph, your statement "would be dependant on a belief that absolute truth has no existence" is incorrect from my point of view. I equate the COINCIDENCE OF OPPOSITES with absolute truth. The internal logic of the COINCIDENCE OF OPPOSITES leads one to the conclusion that it comprises a picture of reality ( truth) that is independent of belief . It does not rest on the foundation of any self-evident axioms. How this is so I will explain in a later post.

Any understanding of absolute "truth" that has as its foundation a so-called "self-evident" assumption, cannot be said to represent absolute truth, since it is dependent on the starting self evident assumption (the belief) from which the understanding of " absolute truth" was derived.

M

[michaelr]

LEAD = MOLYBDOS in Greek. It has a gematria value of 816 in Greek gematria
GOLD = CHRYSOS in Greek. It has a gematria value of 1570 in Greek gematria.
The gematria value of CHRYSOS in Base 6 gematria = 642
The gematria value of CHRIST in Base 6 gematria = 462

CHRIST can be equated with 462 which in turn can be equated to 642 which in turn can be equated to CHRYSOS - GOLD.

(n.b The gematria value of the word CHRISTOS in Base 6 = 666. Since 666 represents the number of the HIEROS GAMOS, CHRISTOS cn be equated with the HIEROS GAMOS)

The gematria value of CHRYSOS of 1570 can be equated to 7015 which using the law of colel can be equated with 7014 which in turn can be equated with 714 = gematria vlue of MARY MAGDALENE.

MARY MAGDALENE was Jesus'( CHRIST's) companion. The Celtic word for Companion = CARA. The number 1570 thus can be equated with CARA. CARA is an angram of ARCA which means TOMB, thus the number 1570 can also be equated with TOMB. Since the number 1570 represents the gematria value of the Greek word CHRYSOS which means GOLD, the word GOLD can be equated with TOMB.

The word MOLYBDOS has a gematria value of 816 which can be equated to 1086 the gematria value of the phrase THE TOMB OF CHRIST. The word MOLYBDOS can thus be seen to represent THE TOMB OF CHRIST and thus be equated with GOLD - CHRYSOS = TOMB, see above. MOLYBDOS can be equated with THE TOMB OF CHRIST and since CHRYSOS can be equated with CHRIST also, MOLYBDOS/LEAD can thus be equated with CHRYSOS = GOLD. This LEAD has been transformed into GOLD.

Since the phrase MOLYBDOS can be equated with both ARCA and CHRIST it represents the COINCIDENCE OF OPPOSITES/HIEROS GAMOS.

Incidentally 642 is also the gematria value of the phrase HOLY GRAIL. Since the word CHRYSOS also has gematria value of 642 and can be equated with MOLYBDOS(816) and thus THE TOMB OF CHRIST, this suggests that the HOLY GRAIL = THE TOMB OF CHRIST.

M

[michaelr]

In the Church of Rennes- le- Chateau there exists a statue of SAINT GERMAINE. SAINT GERMAINE was a SHEPHERDESS. She also had a WITHERED RIGHT HAND. THis seems to be clue connecting to the name SALOME, who also received a WITHERED HAND after testing to see if Mary's virginity was still intact.

See Refuge of the Apocalypse by Elizabeth van Buren, p248 for more on this.

M

[michaelr]

"Early in the morning of the Lord's day the women went to the tomb. They were Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of James whom Jesus delivered out of the hand of Satan, SALOME WHO TEMPTED HIM, Mary who ministered to him and Martha her sister, Joanna ( al. Susanna) the wife of Chuza who had renounced the marriage bed, Berenice who was healed of an issue of blood in Capernaum, Lia( leah) the widow whose son he raised at Nain, and the woman to whom he said. "Thy sins which are many are forgiven thee".
p183, The Book of the Resurrection of Christ by Bartholomew the Apostle, in The Apocryphal New Testament, trans. Montague Rhodes James. 1924.

Can the passage "SALOME WHO TEMPTED HIM" be interpreted as pointing to JESUS having had a son with SALOME?

Could this son be JOHN?

Could JOHN have been a bas..ard.?

Does the reference to the "ANGEL OF THE BA..TARD RACE" by Pierre Plantard when referring to the real secret of the Priory of Sion, refer to ANGEL = ANGE = GEAN = JEAN = JOHN?

More to come.

M

[Azoth]

Originally Posted by michaelr

AZOTH,

STRENGTH = BOAZ = BLACK

WISDOM = JOACHIN = WHITE

http://www2.ida.net/graphics/shirtail/tarot.htm

M

Oh, I thought it was Black, = wisdom/ sophia/ feminine. I shall correct my view.

Many thanks M, I enjoyed the link too. A.

[michaelr]

On page 20-22 of Eliizabeth van Buren's book Refuge of the Apocalypse, there appears the following passages:

" H.Elie discovered a skull in the formation of rocj high in a cliff near brenac. The skull is sitauted at 576m altitude. The cliff is called Capiuo, the head...."

In the choir at the church of Saint julien and Saint Basilisse at brenac the Tablets of the Law are depicted, guarded and held by two lions. ...

Roman numerals are inscribed on the Rablets. The Tablet to the left has V, VI, VII. The seconf Tablet, sloping to the right, has the numerlas I,II,III.

The numerals can be read across:

V + I = 6
VI + II = 8
V + III = 8

The sum of 6,8,8, is 22.....

However one can also read the numerals:

V -I = 4
VI - II = 4
VII - III = 4

She then goes on to show other permutations of the numbers in the tablet that yield the number 576, which has six different permutations.

56 divided by 9 = 63
576 divided by 9 = 64
657 divided by 9 = 73
675 divided by 9 = 75
756 divided by 9 = 84
765 divided by 9 = 85
Total= 444

In light of the significance of the number 444 and the SKULL that has been explained, this just adds further support to the conclusions already drawn.

p.s. It helps to have the book since there are photographs of the rock formation of the skull, and the inscribed TABLETS at the church in Brenac.

M

[michaelr]

The word PYTHAGORAS is a combination of PYTH and AGORAS.

The PYTH refers to PYTHO, which may be interpreted as a reference to PYTHON the SERPENT.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Python_(mythology)

AGORAS is derived from the Greek word AGORA meaning a market,meeting, and also SPEECH.

The name Pythagoras may thus be interpreted as SERPENT SPEECH.

The Serpent is associated with a FORKED TONGUE. People who "SPEAK WITH FORKED TONGUE" are LIARS.

The name PYTHAGORAS therfore may be interpreted as a reference to LIARS.

Is there a clue here to the significance of the LIES that have told in connection with this puzzle?

More to Come.

M