# Thread: Thoughts and Findings related to the Maranatha "Key" Pt. II

1. Expert Twelever Sapphire
Join Date
Aug 2006
Location
UK
Posts
1,661
Originally Posted by hayward
Here I refuse to walk you through it. Your inquiry implies incapabiliy or unwillingness. You have the sources you have the evidence. I was able to figure it out so should you be able to. You are not looking closely enough.

OK - you refuse. It's your 'theory' you can do what you like. But given that you can't or won't say why you picked the R as the starting point, then you have to see why I think your theory is based on arbitrary points. If there is no method/plan or system to the selection, then surely it is arbitrary isn't it?

2. QUOTE JLOCKEST
"Why pick the R as the start point? What method/plan/system did you use to select that letter"
END QUOTE

Your question, Jlockest, is entirely wrong. You have made some assumptions about the construction of the geometry, that are incorrect, and asked a question that does not make sense.
You think that the letter was entirely selected to be the centre of the geometry because it is a letter R. Thus, due to what you perceive as a special selection, you think that it is the start point for the geometry. It is not.
Because you think that the letter R is the starting point for the construction of the geometry, it will seem to you, that the placement of the centre of the circle, and therefore the construction of the rest of the geometry, is "arbitrary".

3. Originally Posted by jlockest
OK - you refuse. It's your 'theory' you can do what you like. But given that you can't or won't say why you picked the R as the starting point, then you have to see why I think your theory is based on arbitrary points. If there is no method/plan or system to the selection, then surely it is arbitrary isn't it?
I can certainly see why you think that because this is what seems to be your approach to everything.

You are like a master of the "either-or" fallacy. Your position always assumes the existence of a false-dichotomy, where it is only either yours or the other which are the only two possibilities. That is position which cant be worked with and cant be reasoned with.

I think then maybe you might appreciate this:

EITHER YOU LOOK FOR IT AND YOU SEE IT OR YOU DON'T LOOK FOR IT AND YOU DON'T SEE IT

This is a rather clear and simole either/or scenario.

I hope you can appreciate then how I would view your line of reasoning as bordering on an almost arrogant disposition of self-reflective assumptions that ignore other realms of possibility. And that also, because if this, you will certainly miss any opportunity of discovery. So, just don't expect everyone to choose in upholding such an attitude as your own; an attitude which appears to be self- absorbed and self-limiting. For me, I will gladly accept simple disagreement but I can't accept willful ignorance. That is a battle which can only be won by each of us ourselves. I just dont see an alternative there, besides maybe some other agenda.

If it isnthe former then you will have to take off your favorite and trusty blinders if you want to see in any other direction than what you think is obvious. Or just stand up, look around and see that that your reflection being cast on the wall is not the entire representation of reality.

Good luck

4. Originally Posted by Rubyfelixir
QUOTE JLOCKEST
"Why pick the R as the start point? What method/plan/system did you use to select that letter"
END QUOTE

Your question, Jlockest, is entirely wrong. You have made some assumptions about the construction of the geometry, that are incorrect, and asked a question that does not make sense.
You think that the letter was entirely selected to be the centre of the geometry because it is a letter R. Thus, due to what you perceive as a special selection, you think that it is the start point for the geometry. It is not.
Because you think that the letter R is the starting point for the construction of the geometry, it will seem to you, that the placement of the centre of the circle, and therefore the construction of the rest of the geometry, is "arbitrary".
To be fair ruby, I did say in the article to start with the'R' because I saw that it would be a quicker way to get to inage. But it doesn't really matter where you begin since the shape is justified in mulitiple places if ONE WERE WILLING TO LOOK AT IT CLOSELY (sorry).

5. Expert Twelever Sapphire
Join Date
Aug 2006
Location
UK
Posts
1,661
Originally Posted by Rubyfelixir
QUOTE JLOCKEST
"Why pick the R as the start point? What method/plan/system did you use to select that letter"
END QUOTE

Your question, Jlockest, is entirely wrong. You have made some assumptions about the construction of the geometry, that are incorrect, and asked a question that does not make sense.
You think that the letter was entirely selected to be the centre of the geometry because it is a letter R. Thus, due to what you perceive as a special selection, you think that it is the start point for the geometry. It is not.
Because you think that the letter R is the starting point for the construction of the geometry, it will seem to you, that the placement of the centre of the circle, and therefore the construction of the rest of the geometry, is "arbitrary".

Ruby,
No - that's why you should never join a conversation part way through. This discussion started elsewhere, where Hayward had already said:

Originally Posted by Hayward
'....The Dagobert Parchment of Rennes Le Chateau fame also contains a similar form.

The steps for finding this are as follows:

Starting with the raised “R” in the center of the document, use this point as the center point...'

6. Expert Twelever Sapphire
Join Date
Aug 2006
Location
UK
Posts
1,661
Originally Posted by hayward
To be fair ruby, I did say in the article to start with the'R' because I saw that it would be a quicker way to get to inage. But it doesn't really matter where you begin since the shape is justified in mulitiple places if ONE WERE WILLING TO LOOK AT IT CLOSELY (sorry).
Then simply state what method/plan/system you used for picking the R.

7. Originally Posted by jlockest
Then simply state what method/plan/system you used for picking the R.
I'd love to join the debate, but I won't be able to. However, I would like to toss an idea in and run.

I think that starting with Resh is entirely logical...

"To read these words proof is given that a scribe can reveal their meaning."

"Resh may be found after a person's name on a gravestone to indicate that they were a Rabbi or to indicate the other use of Rav, as a generic term for a teacher or a personal spiritual guide."

k.. gotta run!

8. Originally Posted by HappyThoth
I'd love to join the debate, but I won't be able to. However, I would like to toss an idea in and run.

I think that starting with Resh is entirely logical...

"To read these words proof is given that a scribe can reveal their meaning."

"Resh may be found after a person's name on a gravestone to indicate that they were a Rabbi or to indicate the other use of Rav, as a generic term for a teacher or a personal spiritual guide."

k.. gotta run!

9. Originally Posted by jlockest
Then simply state what method/plan/system you used for picking the R.
I already have J- its in the statement you quoted. I've been fair and objective with everyone, if you can't reciprocate, fine. I asked you to look at the image and compare the points of the lines with features on the original. It is self-explanatory.

It is like a salad. Do I need to give you instructions about how to make the salad when you can look at it and it holds its own information about what to do? "Is that a cucumber cut with a knife at a thickness of 3cm?" Then you're like; "What should I do with the cucumber that needs to be cut by a knife at a thickness of 3cm, can you show me the method?"

You have the ingredients, you can see what do to next. Do I need to post an elementary school video on drawing lines between points to make 2D shapes? Is it really that complicated?

So there is no single "method" when the method itself is self-descriptive and self-explanatory. As I stated here, I had merely used the "R" as a way to simplify an explanation in the text It is obviously not the only way to begin constructing the image. It is precisely the center of the circle as well as the center of the hexagram. Do you see the points where the radius of the circle intersect? Do you see the points between which lines are drawn? Do you see how the ends of those lines define both points of the hexagram as well as the radius of the circle? No? Ok we can't have a conversation then.

10. Apologies everyone- I think I have overlooked the obvious and thought that basic geometry was common knowledge. It his helps start us off on a good course for discussion, please let me know when we can pick up the conversation. (cute!)