The Genesis Wheel

[Bethsheba Ashe]

Have fun. I know there are those that enjoy seeing if there is anything to this. It is hard to leave biases behind. The method is highly subject to confirmation bias, there will be "hits" the problem is that there were be countless "misses" as well. If one could use the same method by picking and choosing what one wants to read that goes contrary to the Bible it is clearly refuted.

I can account for every word in every line of Genesis 1-2. The whole cherry. So I'm not picking and choosing. The reason why nobody else has done what I have done is because they were all using the wrong key.

Now I'm sure that when you see 20 different people put 20 different wrong keys into a locked door it becomes reasonable to believe the door either does not have a lock or the right key doesn't exist, and you'd scoff at anyone approaching the door with the right key. Maybe you don't even bother to check whether they have the right key because hey, everyone else has failed and some of those were even delusional enough to claim they had opened the door when it clearly remained locked. Thus you youself become as closed as the door - you close your eyes and never see the person with the right key open the door. Your loss, not mine. Have a nice day.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I can account for every word in every line of Genesis 1-2. The whole cherry. So I'm not picking and choosing. The reason why nobody else has done what I have done is because they were all using the wrong key.

Now I'm sure that when you see 20 different people put 20 different wrong keys into a locked door it becomes reasonable to believe the door either does not have a lock or the right key doesn't exist, and you'd scoff at anyone approaching the door with the right key. Maybe you don't even bother to check whether they have the right key because hey, everyone else has failed and some of those were even delusional enough to claim they had opened the door when it clearly remained locked. Thus you youself become as closed as the door - you close your eyes and never see the person with the right key open the door. Your loss, not mine. Have a nice day.

I doubt it, but one question, do you make the error of interpreting Genesis literally?

And you claimed to have evidence. Why did you not answer my question? Perhaps you do not have the evidence that you think that you have.

 

[The Reverend Bob]

Hopefully your book will get you a spot on George Noory Coast to Coast. ;0)

Is this just a literary work or are you going to produce an audio version as well?

Either way best of luck on your endeavors. Being an author is exciting on an individual level no doubt.

I do enjoy unconventional subjects, even if I don't personally abscribe to any of it.

George Noory is a socialist and I can prove it!

 

[The Reverend Bob]

I doubt it, but one question, do you make the error of interpreting Genesis literally?

So far from what I have read , it doesn't exactly deconstruct the Documentary Hypothesis at all. It does not even go close to doing such. It would be best that the author presents it as an alternative to the hypothesis rather than a challenge. But kids have to learn.

 

[Bethsheba Ashe]

So far from what I have read , it doesn't exactly deconstruct the Documentary Hypothesis at all. Not does it go close to doing such. It would be best that the author presents it as an alternative to the hypothesis rather than a challenge. But kids have to learn.

An alternative? So you haven't read the discussion yet. Keep reading old man. You're cute calling a woman my age, past the change and all, a kid. lol.

To the other guy, nope I definitely don't take the bible literally. Nor do I think that gematria comes from or proves God either, if that was going to be your next question. Gosh, you're just filled with assumptions and preconceptions aren't you?

 

[The Reverend Bob]

An alternative? So you haven't read the discussion yet. Keep reading old man. You're cute calling a woman my age, past the change and all, a kid. lol.

To the other guy, nope I definitely don't take the bible literally. Nor do I think that gematria comes from or proves God either, if that was going to be your next question. Gosh, you're just filled with assumptions and preconceptions aren't you?

I am still reading it but understand I come from that school which you are saying you can refute. I am giving you the benefit of the doubt, so far it is entertaining and I learnt a lot but...

 

[Bethsheba Ashe]

I am still reading it but understand I come from that school which you are saying you can refute. I am giving you the benefit of the doubt, so far it is entertaining and I learnt a lot but...

Ah. Do you think you might be experiencing cognitive dissonance yet? That's what a new paradigm does. Fair warning. I spend the first 4 chapters warming up the reader while trying not to overwhelm them, but the gloves come off after that.

 

[The Reverend Bob]

Ah. Do you think you might be experiencing cognitive dissonance yet? That's what a new paradigm does. Fair warning.

You should know I am a Christian non-realist. I am immune to cognitive dissonance, goes with the territory.

 

[Bethsheba Ashe]

You should know I am a Christian non-realist. I am immune to cognitive dissonance, goes with the territory.

Cool, I'm not a Christian or a Jew. I believe in God and I keep the Noachide laws. I'm also a philosophical Thelemite and I sign up to the Penrose/Hammeroff Orch OR model of consciousness. But I think if you invest in anything you can experience cognitive dissonance when your assumptions are challenged. You dont need to be religious.

 

[Subduction Zone]

An alternative? So you haven't read the discussion yet. Keep reading old man. You're cute calling a woman my age, past the change and all, a kid. lol.

To the other guy, nope I definitely don't take the bible literally. Nor do I think that gematria comes from or proves God either, if that was going to be your next question. Gosh, you're just filled with assumptions and preconceptions aren't you?

Not taking the Bible literally is a bit of a two edged sword. First that is good since a literal Genesis is easily refuted. But it has the negative side that it increases the odds of you being guilty of reinterpretation after the fact to match your particular beliefs.

And the second time you dodged a clear question tells me that you do not have any evidence.

 

[Bethsheba Ashe]

Not taking the Bible literally is a bit of a two edged sword. First that is good since a literal Genesis is easily refuted. But it has the negative side that it increases the odds of you being guilty of reinterpretation after the fact to match your particular beliefs.

And the second time you dodged a clear question tells me that you do not have any evidence.

And I think you won't assess the evidence that I am currently giving out freely, until the 1st August. You want me to reduce the whole body of evidence to a few snappy phrases you can spend the minimum amount of time lazily deconstructing with the usual dialectic tools.

Aleister Crowley once said "The sin which is unpardonable is knowingly and wilfully to reject truth, to fear knowledge lest that knowledge pander not to thy prejudices."

 

[Subduction Zone]

And I think you won't assess the evidence that I am currently giving out freely, until the 1st August. You want me to reduce the whole body of evidence to a few snappy phrases you can spend the minimum amount of time lazily deconstructing with the usual dialectic tools.

Aleister Crowley once said "The sin which is unpardonable is knowingly and wilfully to reject truth, to fear knowledge lest that knowledge pander not to thy prejudices."

Look who is full of assumptions now. It appears that you do not have evidence. I asked you a reasonable question that you repeatedly ducked. You may be guilty of your own sin there. I was merely trying to see if you approached your own beliefs rationally. At best you only have confirmation bias. People that have evidence are willing to risk being wrong. It is the only way to learn at times.

 

[Bethsheba Ashe]

Look who is full of assumptions now. It appears that you do not have evidence. I asked you a reasonable question that you repeatedly ducked. You may be guilty of your own sin there. I was merely trying to see if you approached your own beliefs rationally. At best you only have confirmation bias. People that have evidence are willing to risk being wrong. It is the only way to learn at times.

I thought I did answer your question. Please clarify what question you are referring to?

 

[Subduction Zone]

I thought I did answer your question. Please clarify what question you are referring to?

You ignored my most important question:

"What reasonable test would refute your concept? This is a serious question. If you cannot answer it then by definition what you have in your book is not evidence."

 

[Bethsheba Ashe]

You ignored my most important question:

"What reasonable test would refute your concept? This is a serious question. If you cannot answer it then by definition what you have in your book is not evidence."

Ok, if you could use Standard Gematria, which is only 2 letter values different from the key btw, or indeed any other type of gematria but using Standard would be best, to reproduce the same gate results of the seven palaces in every line of Genesis 1-2, using the same scribal conventions mind you, then that would refute my evidence and show it was arbitrary. Of course, I don't believe that can be done.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Ok, if you could use Standard Gematria, which is only 2 letter values different from the key btw, or indeed any other type of gematria but using Standard would be best, to reproduce the same gate results of the seven palaces in every line of Genesis 1-2, using the same scribal conventions mind you, then that would refute my evidence and show it was arbitrary. Of course, I don't believe that can be done.

Sorry, but that is not a proper test. You are basing your test on the success or failure of a competing idea. A proper test would refute your idea based upon its own merits.

 

[Bethsheba Ashe]

Sorry, but that is not a proper test. You are basing your test on the success or failure of a competing idea. A proper test would refute your idea based upon its own merits.

No Im not. Its exactly the same idea with a different number set. If you could do the same thing with another number set it would show the key is not unique.

 

[Bethsheba Ashe]

I don't see how you can understand my answer without reading my book however. What are the seven palaces? What are the gates of the seven palaces? What are the scribal conventions? I bet that flew right over your head. What a shame I cant explain it all to you with a few snappy phrases eh?

 

[Bethsheba Ashe]

Well, I'm off to bed. Gnight.

 

[Subduction Zone]

No Im not. Its exactly the same idea with a different number set. If you could do the same thing with another number set it would show the key is not unique.

It is still a failed test. You are assuming that one will be right. It is far more likely that both are wrong. That is why your test has no value. I cannot base a test of whether 2 + 2 = 5 on how a competing idea that claims 2 + 2 = 3 does. Once again your test must be based upon the merits of your idea independent of how others do with the same info.