Mysteries :  The Official GrahamHancock.com forums
For serious discussion of the controversies, approaches and enigmas surrounding the origins and development of the human species and of human civilization. (NB: for more ‘out there’ posts we point you in the direction of the ‘Paranormal & Supernatural’ Message Board). 
Welcome! Log InRegister
You are right I do assume that these areas of the Kabbalah are proven because my source data is Jewish mysticism.

I am a Christian trying to understand a Jewish text.

Rabbi A. Kaplan wrote in his work SEFIRAH YETSIFER a similar listing of the 32 Elohyms in the First Chapter of Genesis.

In fact it was Rabbi Kaplan that put me on to the Kabbalistic Tree of Life in the First Chapter of Genesis.

Kaplan erred in one (two places) placement of his 32 Elohym which snowballed into two error which I easily corrected.

Now there is a basic difference of thought between Judaism and Christianity.

Judaism thinks linearly = the Messiah will come.

Christianity thinks circularly = the Messiah will return.

Because Rabbi Kaplan thought linearly he had his listing in a linear mode and he had two errors.

As a Christian I simply placed the 32-Elohyms in a circle (because I had already seen prior to this that Genesis was written in a cycle). I then corrected the error and analyzed the diagram mathematically. The result is my research.

I also take the Jewish ZOHAR the most important Kabbalistic Text in Judaism and take it to heart and apply the rules to the text of Genesis. I found that by doing so I unlocked some of Genesis most important secrets.

Now I happen to be the most inventive Kabbalist since the middle ages. Nobody that I personally know of, with all the books and tapes that have been publish, could light a match to the sunshine of my research.

That is not bragging that is merely the facts. As Joe Friday would say, "Just the facts, just the facts".

The interesting thing about the Kabbalistic Research is that there is not much to learn. There are very few fact know known about the research. Though you will get all these goody goody and emotional love, sex, physical, KABBALAH which I know is nonsense, but if that is your cup of tea. For me the Hermetic Way is the only way. In other words if it is not scientific I don't want to deal with it.

My friends believe that I am without emotion. I tell them emotion has no place in religion unless of course it has to do with the Animal Envoy.

I am working on a major revamping of my research to place on one large website linking them all together. It will take a year or two for the revision.

Mean while I get different ideas from different forums.

Enjoy

Bill Meegan

Options: ReplyQuote


Subject Views Written By Posted
Hancock's Challenge: A Response 367 Garrett Fagan 27-Nov-00 22:34
C-14 an academic joke!! 142 William John Meegan 27-Nov-00 23:52
RE: C-14 an academic joke!! 139 Garrett Fagan 28-Nov-00 00:05
RE: C-14 an academic joke!! 140 Garrett Fagan 28-Nov-00 00:11
Be more inventive than that: PLEASE 130 William John Meegan 28-Nov-00 00:55
RE: C-14 an academic joke!! 140 William John Meegan 28-Nov-00 00:50
RE: C-14 an academic joke!! 131 jameske 28-Nov-00 00:23
RE: C-14 an academic joke!! 139 oziris 28-Nov-00 02:10
RE: C-14 an academic joke!! 121 Bryan 28-Nov-00 02:18
RE: C-14 an academic joke!! 124 Brian A 28-Nov-00 14:50
RE: C-14 an academic joke!! 126 Bryan 28-Nov-00 14:58
RE: C-14 an academic joke!! 128 Brian A 28-Nov-00 14:48
To Brian 132 William John Meegan 28-Nov-00 15:35
RE: WJ Meegans sanity 133 CSICOPdivision2 28-Nov-00 16:53
CSICOP is a very rude child: a cry baby 101 William John Meegan 28-Nov-00 17:26
RE: CSICOP is a very rude child: a cry baby 145 Bryan 29-Nov-00 02:19
RE: To Brian 151 Brian A 29-Nov-00 17:41
To Brian: THE KABBALISTIC QUEST 147 William John Meegan 01-Dec-00 01:57
RE: Hancock's Challenge: A Response 168 Graham Hancock 28-Nov-00 02:24
RE: Hancock The Underdog 101 Mark 28-Nov-00 11:42
RE: Hancock's Challenge: A Response 146 Garrett Fagan 28-Nov-00 16:10
RE: Hancock's Challenge: A Response 169 Graham Hancock 28-Nov-00 19:10
RE: Hancock's Challenge: A Response 103 laura 28-Nov-00 21:27
RE: Hancock's Challenge: A Response 109 CSICOP 29-Nov-00 09:29
RE: Hancock's Challenge: A Response 148 Graham Hancock 29-Nov-00 10:37
RE: Hancock's Challenge: A Response 128 Garrett Fagan 29-Nov-00 15:02
RE: Hancock's Challenge: A Response 154 Graham Hancock 29-Nov-00 15:51
RE: Hancock's Challenge: A Response 121 Pilgrim333 28-Nov-00 05:22
RE: Hancock's Challenge: A Response 129 Sky 29-Nov-00 17:24
RE: Hancock's Challenge: A Response 129 Robert G. Bauval 28-Nov-00 07:40
RE: Hancock's Challenge: A Response 122 Christophe Leijnen 28-Nov-00 11:08
RE: Hancock's Challenge: A Response 121 R. Avry Wilson 28-Nov-00 11:55
RE: Hancock's Challenge: A Response 112 Mark 28-Nov-00 12:41
RE: Hancock's Challenge: A Response 133 R. Avry Wilson 28-Nov-00 13:43
RE: Hancock's Challenge: A Response 138 Mark 28-Nov-00 13:49
RE: Hancock's Challenge: A Response 151 Pilgrim333 29-Nov-00 01:12
RE: Hancock's Challenge: A Response 127 Garrett Fagan 29-Nov-00 15:49
RE: Hancock's Challenge: A Response 142 R. Avry Wilson 29-Nov-00 11:18


Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.