Meter Threads

FrankForum Archives

Meter Quick Links
← Poetic Meter Resource Index
← Poetic Meter Forum Threads
← Poetic Meter Excel Docs + Webpages
← Poetic Meter Word Docs + Webpages
← Downloads Index (All Files)

An archive of all the poetic meter related threads from the FrankForum. Also consolidated are threads 'related' to the meter here, so that everything's in one place. The Matthew 24 thread is on its own page due to its size.

Some of the threads have outdated material and propose hypothesis already solved, but all of the attached .PDFs are updated to their latest.

Master Meter list

brainout | 18 Apr 2017, 20:07

If you're brand new to the concept of the Bible having TIME meter, start here: How God Orchestrates Time

Then here: Bible Meter, Intro & Overview (Matt24Meter)

Else, your eyes will glaze over too often. This material is provable, but complex, especially since our ancestors didn't pass down the information to kids post-Cross. It's a political powder keg, the material, so that's why they stopped talking about it: the TIME METER is about countdown to Messiah, the Guy Who Will defeat all the kings of the earth, so of course knowing that would make you persona non grata in any kingdom.

Before frankforum, I documented what meter I found in docs which I turned into videos (doc links are downloadable as are the videos).

Link to the main videos: ... :thumbnail

Master list pre-frankforum: LukeDatelineMeters.pdf or htm. Since Anonynomenon in frankforum found the Matthew24 etc meters, the foregoing link doesn't yet include any of that material. Instead, it's in frankforum and videos starting below.

The many videos on the Matt24 and other videos in Research and here in TextCrit are lumped together in chronological order, here Matt24 Meter

Bible Prophetical-Historical Timelines

brainout | 27 May 2016, 11:07

CAUTION: this material is addicting. Make sure you clear with God first, if and how much attention you should pay to it. Be skeptical too, as there is ZERO information in academia on this, and all the alleged timelines we do have, are all vastly wrong. So that's a big claim, and must be viewed askance, prior to vetting. Will take a long time to vet what follows, but it's all in Bible, so all forensic, using whatever original Hebrew or Greek texts you have. The texts I use, are all pasted from Bibleworks 5 or 9 without emendation.

I'm gonna park the timelines here for easy access. This post will be edited, as there are many timelines in the Bible which I've already documented. Takes time to list them all.

Master worksheet: GeneYrs.xls uses ONLY Bible verses, which you can find here: brainoutFAQ.htm#6a. The meaning of the 1050 structure is provided in videos with much more detail, here: vimeo-how-god-orchestrates-time.htm.

Prophetical timelines are often historical, meaning the past history mapped, is precursor of the future.

Genesis 1 is the first such timeline, retrospective to establish the future, videos (with downloadable docs in their descriptions), starting here: Videos prior in that same playlist, overlap with the howgodorchestratestime channel.

Psalm 90 picks up at the same place as Genesis, but goes future in the first four and last two verses, to give a historical plan of history, 5250 years including a literal Millennium: vimeo-psalm90.htm

Isaiah 53 picks up where Psalm 90 leaves off, creating a retrospective and then future exposition, from First David's Birth to Last David's Death, with each syllable equalling one year, and the whole history of the remaining kings, Temple Rebuilding, Greek takeover, etc. listed. Basic outline videos of this structure, begin here: vimeo-isa-53-meter.htm

Daniel 9 is crafted from Isaiah 53, literally using it for past history, then going forward to show how the Daniel 2 Man of Time interrelates within the Isaiah 53 timeline, to countdown to Messiah: vimeo-dan-9.htm

Next, we're in the first text for the New Testament, which had been orally memorized and then later transcribed by Luke: the Magnificat, spoken by Mary in Adar, 5 BC. She updates Daniel 9's timeline: vimeo-GGS11s.htm

The Lord then updates her timeline to show future history to 3250 AD, if the Rapture doesn't happen (and even if it does), which we are working on now here in frankforum: viewtopic.php?f=16&t=512

So what He does, is 'sandwich' to Psalm 90, elongating the entire timeline (including Mill) from 5250 to 7350. This may be the real source of modern Judaism's idea of a 'Messiah 2000', since Talmud Sanhedrin 97-99 was written after Christ spoke Matt 24-25 verses (which was back in 30AD).

Caution: do not use the Timeline to estimate when Time actually ends. It's real future history, but the structure makes clear that it's not 'the end', using an even number (7x1050, when you sandwich in the Matt text with Moses). Whether later NT books ADD to this timeline, we don't yet know.

Latest updated Matt24-25 meter versions:

Paul and Luke 21 play on this timeline, sandwiching their text to it. We're not yet sure exactly how Paul's sandwich works, whereas Luke begins his syllable 1 at same place as Matt24:1, and only goes for 1050 years past the pre-Church Millennium scheduled prior per Psalm 90.

Next, Peter and all the other NT writers, all 'tag' their timelines to Paul's. Not sure how they do it in all respects. Peter makes an antiphonal song out of Paul's text, and thus elucidates details Paul didn't provide. Videos on that, here: vimeo-peter-meters.htm

It's clear John in Revelation 17 is playing off Ephesians 1:9 in Paul, using the same 'mystery' moniker for Church, so Political Church (which Origen started with the Severans in 217 AD, the 'time' of Eph1:9, and Constantine insititutionalized, the anaphora focus of Ephesians 1:12). But precisely how John's meter timeline ties (though it uses the same 364 rhetorical style of Paul's), I'm not yet sure.

The meters are extensively documented, with a syllabus, in LukeDatelineMeters.pdf pages 1-2. You can change the pdf to htm and read online without download.

Vimeo contains the meters, mostly. Master list of them (including downloadable docs in each video's description) is here: vimeo-archive.htm

brainout | 29 May 2016, 17:47

I could play this over and over and over...

Mark 13's version of Matt24

brainout | 19 Jan 2017, 08:10

I first checked the CNTTS apparatus for Greek variants which can affect syllable counts (leaving out some, cuz they looked like they were based on Latin texts), and made a master WITHOUT metering it.


Will work on the meter, but now you can too.. without the hassle of formatting the text. Lessee what we come up with?

brainout | 20 Jan 2017, 04:27

This seems to be my smoking-gun proof that whoever did Beza's text, COUNTED SYLLABLES to get that first amen legw humin. Since no scribe even knew syllable counting existed, seems pretty likely that the way to PROVE THE AUTOGRAPH is to find a copy that proves SYLLABLES WERE COUNTED.

See, here's the pic in BW9, see how that codex is not like the others, its lines go by CLAUSE, see

Or a clearer way to see the Beza codex for 13, how the writer begins lines by clauses,

Notice how nearly every line begins with a conjunction or prep. That's what you'd need to do if COUNTING SYLLABLES PER CLAUSE. But I see no syllable counts there. Yet that style of listing the text lines is so unusual yet cannot be alone, I bet there are other mss 'out there' which do the same: some, maybe even have counts in the margins?

I hope it violates no copyright laws to show the pic, since its point is to demo the text's uniqueness, not make money on it.

Just compare the draft of Mark 13 I'm working on now at the first 119 syllables versus Matt24 and Luke 21. Again, I inserted all the relevant CNTTS variants in BW9 into the Mark 13 text, and then struck out the ones I didn't count, just as in the Template.. but here I counted some of the variants.

Here's the pdf for Mark 13 I'm working on. COUNT THE SYLLABLES to the last amen legw humin and see how they SEVEN.

I'm revising them again in the latest videos, but here again are the latest uploads for Matt24 and Luke 21:

The revisions don't change the syllable counts above, but I'm breaking Luke into more visible clauses, fixing Matt25:30b to 14, etc. Totals at right columns remain the same.

If you'd rather have docs, and you have BW fonts, let me know.

As refresher, here's how that syllable accounting works to validate text, cross-ref, dateline, and count prophecy annually, Matt24 vs Luke21, LUKE TAGS MATT SYLLABLES 1/18: Matt24Meter

Anonynomenon | 22 Jan 2017, 06:14

Ok, so I metered Mark 13 using the Template you provided. Thank you so much, it made it so much easier.

I tried to follow the Westcott and Hort 1881 manuscript (simply because I find it reliable in many cases), but did deviate in two instances. I used ποιήσουσιν (4 syllables) rather than δώσουσιν (3 syllables) in Mark 13:22, and I omitted the αὐτοῦ (2 syllables) in Mark 13:27b. I made these changes, because they appear to work better with the meter, but the whole thing might work better if we use a combination of different variances.

Mark 13:30 ends at 1052 syllables (because of the hoti). I don't know what to make of that.

Also, Mark 13:32b-35 is a solid 126. I find that a bit odd, so I'm wondering if some of those clauses could be broken down even further to yield more sub-sevening. I will experiment with that later.

brainout | 22 Jan 2017, 06:41

Okay, so what are you using as the meaning of the two datelines?
42 years before 69 AD is what? And how is it that 42 relates to the text of admiring the buildings?
126 years before 69 AD is what? How does it relate to the disciples?
Ending count is 1246 so 1276 AD. What's important about that?

Anonynomenon | 22 Jan 2017, 07:12

42 years prior to 69 AD could be the start of our Lord's ministry in 27 AD, since He is the true Temple.

Then 126 years prior to 69 AD could be the division of the Hasmonean kingdom into 5 districts by Aulus Gabinius in 57 BC. Since Judah fell with the destruction of Temple in 70 AD, maybe the second dateline is playing off the disintegration of the Hasmonean kingdom.

brainout | 22 Jan 2017, 23:54

The other meter you want to proof is the total. What does it mean? 1246 is 1050+196. Why?

I'm doing the same: why is 'my' 1281 the total? 1050+231, so I can claim Mark's evoking the meter of Daniel 9:24-27, but why the PAST total, and why include the 14? If I then add up all the uniquely-occurring initial NT dateline meters I get the same 231 total, including the yet-future '7' dateline meter of John's Gospel. Okay, but is that coincidence or intentional, and why?

Again, when you get the right answer, everything is supposed to click in place like a finished jigsaw puzzle. I don't see where we got that yet. Luke 21 alone seems 'done', but I wonder, since it doesn't add more than its own initial years-to-pre-Church Mill as its total (1050+35), whereas Matthew and Mark go past those values.

brainout | 23 Jan 2017, 04:50

Well, first look at the meters you got. 42 in the context of admiring Temple Building makes no sense to me, as 42 is a positive meter, Jacob leaving Haran with two families, 21 years after he entered to get but one wife. But then Eph1 talks of two walls, so if admiring one temple led to two...

Then your 126 meter in connection with naming four of the apostles, could be a kind of memorial. At least two of them are dead when Mark writes: Peter's meter (and Jude's too, he being brother of dead James and BOTH of their names being Jacobus in Greek).. is 126, 28x2=56+70 in 2nd Peter, Jude 6a/6b and 2 Peter’s REVISED Meter: Bible Dateline Meters

So there is some possibility those meters are the right ones?

Okay, to your question: thinking over 'your' 196 versus 'my' 231 as the overage ending in Mark.

196=7+14+21+28+35+42+49. All the meters come from these, and all of them are used as dateline meters in the Bible I've seen so far. So 7+49=56, so the total doesn't need to go that far. As you do the actual addition, you'll see the others at each +.

231, is Dan9:24-27 meter, Dan924HebParsed.pdf. I did a video on it where I got interrupted by God in the middle for making mistakes and didn't edit that out (too long, sorry) 24Ps90 God Trinity-Meters Double Tribulation in Daniel 9:24-27: b-out Psalm 90 Meter of Time, Exegesis

So it's as if, at 231, Mark ends with a meter mnemonic as an epilogue, reminding the reader of God's response to granting Daniel's prayer for more time and Temple Rebuilding. Idea that the close of the 1050 'play' is that God will grant Church more time maybe based ON Daniel's prayer, since after all Christ dies at the start of the 62nd week not the end.

The sum is also equal to the initial NT dateline meters, 7+14+21+28+35+42+49+56+35 . What's interesting here is the doubling of 35 and that JOHN'S GOSPEL alone has a 7 initial dateline meter.. not written yet. So if the prophecy of dateline meters comes true then again you know Mark's Gospel Chap 13, comes from God.

I wonder how many of the meters use this same style, if indeed this is the style. For Matt24's 63 ends up being a prophecy of Luke's meter but also other NT books (not all of them, unless you break the 63 into 7s). Luke ends with 35, which ties back to his initial chapter meter, and of course Matt24 does too.

Bigger point is for sure, that these numbers are deliberate. Whether we can say the above meanings are the right interp of them, is a whole diff kettle of fish.

brainout | 24 Jan 2017, 10:20

Here's an interesting (copyrighted) writeup by a Cambridge guy on how the Franks reacted to some strange weather they experienced in 830-875 AD. Compare that to the same periods in each Luke, Mark, and Matthew. The meter doesn't match but does help us to see what people were thinking that does fit the text.

brainout | 06 Feb 2017, 19:43

Okay, I needed to make changes due to the variants. Some of them I'd ignored, were so universal and made the meter work so aptly, it seems almost certain that Mark intended them. Much better sevening resulted, with patterns I didn't notice before. Same name, but the online version posted earlier is still preserved. Here, only in this forum, is the revision.

Some meters still bother me. But it's a lot closer, probably, in this revision.

Total meter is unchanged, cuz it's a shorthand metaphor for granting a new 490 through to the end of CA, to say '231'.

brainout | 08 Feb 2017, 11:03

Compare this gif of the rise of the Mongol empire and its stopping, to the similar years in Mark 13. (GIF is on suspended account)

Now compare to:

Notice that Mark amalgamates both Matt25 virgins and three-slaves parables in that ending.

Looks like Mark might be focusing on the Eastern Empire, whereas Luke is focusing on the West?

Anonynomenon | 09 Feb 2017, 03:12

So Matt 24-25 is tracking general Church trends, as a master theme, while Luke tracks West and Mark tracks East? That might explain why John never wrote about the Olivet Discourse, but instead was given the Book of Revelation. He was give the three strand of prophecy woven together into one.

brainout | 09 Feb 2017, 08:21

Yeah. So in light of that, look at this bio on the last real BYZ emperor, search on 'Emperor and Church' or 'unity' and be prepared for a Rev17 shock,

Remember, these were the guys who ALWAYS HAD AND COULD READ the Greek.
Kill me now.

brainout | 11 Feb 2017, 14:45

Now posting the Mark 13 videos, starting here: How Mark13 tags Matt24 and Luke 21, p1: Matt24Meter

Latest Mark 13 pdf now online, Mark13Meter.pdf and is NOT the same as the original uploads in this thread. Am still editing it also.

As far as mapping out how Mark diverges into the history of the East starting in 325 AD, there's too much to explain. He first plays with the locations when Constantine and his sons all die, which most people TODAY wouldn't even understand why, that's a witty segue.

The chronology of the rulers is important. Scroll down to 'THE EASTERN EMPIRE' to know what to look up, here:

Also Siege of Constantinople (many times in history), Byzantine Empire articles in Wiki are helpful, plus many of the 'timeline of Constantinople' or 'Byzantium' sites (some better than others).

brainout | 13 Feb 2017, 03:37

Okay, turns out Mark 13 is doing for Byzantine history what Paul did for Western Rome, and it's a biting annual prophetic satire. Example: Mark 13:34's phrase 'and He gave to His slaves' marks the Latin sack and takeover of Constantinople in 1204.

Many specifics like that one. Here's the revised meter, but am still going through the anaphora keywords so the text will change again.

In case I forget, the latest versions will be Mark13MeterR.doc (if BW fonts) and Mark13MeterR.pdf

For like Paul (so the reader would see it quickly), Mark constructs anaphora out of keywords, starting with Blepw; it starts with very alive Titus' future death as the first occurrence of Blepw; next is Septimius Severus; next Blepw is the 'center' on the yet-future Constantine; but Blepw does not cover his own death, but when he kills Licinius his brother-in-law, his own wife and son Crispus in rapid succession. So he's seeing their deaths which he caused, and they're not seeing anything, get the pun?

The ide occurrences also seven to Blepw, but I don't see any Bible stress. They are all turning points in Byzantine history, usually from recovery back to decline. Death is stressed each time, of the Emperor in question, though the first ref is to Nero who doesn't die at the benchmark, but killed his mother then. Of course, Nero is newly dead when Mark writes, so the connection will be a pregnant one.

So later they will be added, so the 'nest' depicted in the Notes of the pdf will be changed.

Just as Paul had done with the eta's in thelematos, Mark uses Blepw to show reversal by a successor. The successor might be bad or good, but Blepw rulers tagged were all reformers.

This tagging continues with the kurios and huios keywords, as each such time was a turning point in getting Bible manuscripts out of Byzantium and into the West. Scholars know this already, but they don't know Mark is tagging the years it happened, using the same meaning of those tags as in Matthew 24-25!

I wonder now what Luke might be tagging, tho he uses almost none of these keywords, if I recall correctly.

Last edited by brainout on 14 Feb 2017, 04:59, edited 1 time in total.

brainout | 04 Mar 2017, 04:53

Update: Mark13MeterR.pdf now has Byzantine History, revised meter which is spot on re that history, balances more obviously to Matt24/Luke21 as well, astonishing stuff. The above playlist now has 96 vids, so 10 more on Mark 13 and how Rev17 uses it, with many more to come.

I'm blown away at how much difference the variants make and how so much clicks into place when the right ones are found. Had to revamp Matt24 and Luke 21 as a consequence:

brainout | 15 Mar 2017, 12:12

Mark 13's Meter was updated, so use the link again if you want to see it, Mark13MeterR.pdf. Can now download en masse from the downloads directory.

brainout | 08 Oct 2017, 03:01

Series will resume after October 15th, with a much-more indepth 'Quantum Bible' showing all the related passages for the Constantine-Justinian I period.

brainout | 23 Jul 2018, 10:48

I also have to redo ALL of the Revelation 17 videos. 7-syllable error moves all the syllable counts up. Words philas and blasphemias each have NO elisions, so add one syllable each when you get there. Current 227 should be 5 higher, math error, so it becomes 234 with the elision corrections.

So make those changes. Ruins all the Rev videos I've done but the NEW results are FAR BETTER and more biting sarcasm, so worth it (i.e., musterion standalone word now references the Council of Nicaea and Constantine dies at 'whore'.

Shortcut, use current Rev17R.pdf and just add 7 syllables to the 227, read as if those extra seven were there, as the corrected year.

Ecclesiastes meter

Anonynomenon | Joined: 25 Aug 2015, 22:51

I plan on metering the entire book of Ecclesiastes. I've started with chapter one. Right now, I'm just playing around with it, but here is what I have so far. Its a word document, so you can play with it if you like. I know its probably better to count all syllables (I'll take care of that part later) before picking elisions, but I tend to meter as I go along.

Last edited by Anonynomenon on 08 Apr 2017, 06:13, edited 1 time in total.

brainout | 07 Apr 2017, 09:23

Wow. I see what you mean. 119 will be clarified after you do the rest of the meter. Since he benchmarks at 80, and 1Kings6:1 essentially says the Temple started construction when David would have been 80, seems like Solomon is writing the year after the Temple was dedicated, hence the 3 emphasis? Remember, he'd spent a total of 20, 13 years he spent on his own stuff; so when David would have been 91, making the year of writing 949, a year after 1Kings9? So he's parsing the 3's and 10 to 3 year hiatus after David died (1Kings2:39), then 7 for building, then dedication, total of 10; 13-3 on his palace, hence the total is 20, yet 13 total years he also spent building other stuff. But that's a third dateline, we'd have to know for sure what the first two mean.

So if he really was out of fellowship, must have been during. I thought Thieme said Eccles is about his time out of fellowship (but maybe written partly or mostly after he recovered, looking back on that time)?

brainout | 07 Apr 2017, 17:20

POST STILL UNDER CONSTRUCTION until this line is removed.

Wait, need to reclassify the numbers. Just hit me, what those datelines might mean and yes there are three. Talk to God, k? Two agree, etc.

Seems like Solomon is adopting the Genesis 1/John meter style of using every clause as a date. But for SURE he's playing on the Davidic 14s in 2Sam23. If we just go by verses to eliminate quibbles over where the clauses parse, 2Sam23:1 is 42 syllables, and 23:2 is 14. Verse 3 is 28, elision of some kind has to occur between the end of elohe and the start of Yisrael. So the total is 84 syllables.

I just don't know exactly what he benchmarks.

I had to fix it, so if you downloaded it prior to 4/7/17 at 10:30 pm Central Time US, you need to download it again. Next I'll try to fill in what's below.

I, Solomon, write you 14th/14 year after
which is 56 years after
when David would have been age 91, the Temple was Dedicated
and I'm writing when he would have been age 119?
and I'm writing when the Kingship of Israel (since Saul) is 119 years old (play on Moses writing en 1:5 when he was 119)?

So Solomon is writing Ecc in his last year of reign. So whatever time he was out of fellowship, it's not when he writes Ecc, so it's retrospective exposition. Or maybe Chap1 is a cover letter of sorts, and he's now PUBLISHING stuff he wrote when out of fellowship.

Wait, gotta rethink.

Given the changed meter in 2Sam23, suggest you make 1a=6 syllables and 5b=4, for if you do that makes it clearer Solomon is aping David's syllable counts, changing first dateline to 70 when Solomon began rule. His age 80 when Temple construction began, age 91 when Temple Dedicated, and 119 remain intact.

Those changes then also reflect the paired 15s David uses and match when he became king at Hebron. I suspect the resultant 76 should be 77 but don't know how.

But then, we have 70 91 119 as datelines. What do they mean? Not sure. BBL.

Anonynomenon | 08 Apr 2017, 01:43

I don't think Solomon was out of fellowship while writing Ecc. I think he must have been writing retrospectively, on what he learned about being out of fellowship for long periods of time. Basically, everything is vanity, everything will pass away. God and His word are all there is to make it worth while.

Anonynomenon | 08 Apr 2017, 06:15

I updated the Ecclesiastes meter for chapter one. It is posted in the Original Post.

brainout | 08 Apr 2017, 06:47

You're eliding too much, to shoehorn into a sevening. Don't do any eliding at first, see if you find meter patterns (i.e., two or more clauses of the same syllable counts, so maybe they are meant to parallel each other); then elide accordingly. The text might not mean to seven except rarely, like Revelation 17 (which really is one chapter thru Chap19, but I can't do it now): Rev doesn't seven at all after 252, until 868 or maybe (if NO elisions), 875. Even so, the chapter end in English is not the end in Greek so who knows how it will go.

I'd bet whole chapters only seven at the dateline beginning and at the end so you can know you counted the syllables rightly. Not every chapter needs to seven a lot. Timelines need to show the sevening time deadlines, but surely many chapters are not meant to be timelines.

Luke's Meter

brainout | 8 Mar 2016, 21:34

EDIT: video playlist showing Luke 21 and how it relates to Matt24 metering starts here:

Luke 21 is updated. You can always get the latest update by clicking here.

For the Matt24 metering thread, click here frankforum/viewtopic.php?f=16&t=512.

The master list of the meters so far and Luke's Chap 1 Gospel and Acts meters are here. IF you prefer to see the htm version, click here. The htm is perhaps more useful when using all the links to the rest of the material.

If I update LukeDatelineMeter, this thread will say so.

brainout | 18 Mar 2016, 21:35

Related, but not yet in LukeDatelineMeter, is the meter of Chapter21. I'm just doing it now, to compare with Anonymenon's Matt24 meter.

Chapter 21's Greek is pasted without edit from BibleWorks 9 BGT. I didn't yet check for variants in the CNTTS apparatus (or the other ones) which come bundled with BibleWorks 9. (By contrast, the above LukeDatelineMeters.pdf uses BibleWorks 5 BGT, and includes variants if there are any.)

Attached is the 2-page meter parsing to this post. Note that, inter alia, Luke uses the same datelines for Chapter 21 as he uses in each his intro to 'Theophilus' and to his own Luke 1 Gospel, starting with the line about Zecharias. He also uses James' meter. The chapter plays obviously on Matt24, again demonstrating how Matthew is the first Gospel (duh, why scholars say otherwise only proves they ape the church fathers rather than doing their own research de novo).

So it becomes easy to know how to read Chapter 21: it counts to 1085 (a sevening), which is 35 years to the Mill at the time Luke writes Chapter 21; which is also, 28 years after Christ dies, 63 years after Zecharias got his visit, and thus ends with the end of the NEXT 1050 which was SUPPOSED to be the actual Mill's end, had Christ not been rejected. So comes to be the first 1085 of Church, aligning with the historical 1050s everyone then long knew.

NOTE: Luke is using the pre-Church 1050 schedule, not the new one that got established when Christ died, which Matthew is using. So Luke is reconciling old to the new one. How that affects any annual timeline satire I haven't yet assessed (i.e., where does Luke align with Matt24).

It's not so easy to see where the meter is intended to not merely interleave with Matthew, but elaborate. Same, for how Paul might be playing to Luke as well as Matthew. I need to further study the meter interplay.

brainout | 20 Mar 2016, 06:58

This is a long but useful post demonstrating the Bible 3-D 'sandwich' rhetorical style. Scholars don't know of it, especially not for the NT. Writers of NT QUOTE EACH OTHER, which is one way to know what books were 'out' when a writer, writes. So much obfuscation concerning whether Matthew is the first Gospel and in what language, is thus avoided. But it's tedious, to do this analysis. Hence the long post, though of only 3 'samples'.

Peter layered his text atop Paul's, which I learned a few years back, here. I thought the text was interleaved to make a marching song. Maybe instead, it is a 'sandwich', as you'll see below with respect to Matt24, Eph1:3-14, and finally, Luke 21. The latter two's text is unedited BGT (=UBS) in Bibleworks 5 and 9, respectively. You can ask Anonynomen where he got his Matt24 text, but I saw no difference between it and BGT I have.

Both Matthew 24 and Luke 21 dateline meter from the year of Christ's death. So Syllable=Year One = 'our' 30 AD.

Paul, meters from Christ's SUPPOSED-TO-BE Birth under the pre-David schedule (based on Abraham's maturation). So Paul's syllable=Year 30 = 'our' 30AD. Paul measures from beginning of year, on Roman Time (which had the same 3-year hickey our BC/AD timeline has). Not sure Matt and Luke are doing that. So Paul might be up one syllable, as shown below. PDF won't paste the Pauline Greek, so it's transliterated. Full text (pasted from Bibleworks unedited) here.

First Example: Temple Down, 70AD

Second Example: Re-Rise of the Severans, 218 AD

Third Example: Rise of Diocletian and thus Constantine and Political Harlot Church, 283-325AD

EDIT: video showing this slightly differently, is here:

Actually, this is a US election issue for President: both Donald Trump and Ted Cruz are backed by 'Dominionism', which is the Protestant version of the same attempt to unify Church and State, which is as anti-Bible and anti-US Constitution, as you can get. It all started back in 283 AD...

Rise of Diocletian per his own private accounting, started 283 AD. He got a 'prophecy' from a gypsy saying that when he killed a boar, he'd become Emperor (or so he interpreted it); this he did, in 283 (killing an alleged conspirator in a Caesar's death).. so took the purple.

This is the guy whose institutions ended the Crisis of the Third Century, and whose institutions formed what would become under Constantine, the 'catholic' church, unity of Church and state. Matt24 warns of it, thus:

Yep, that's the history of this period. It only gets worse from this point onward.

Kinda biting sarcasm against a period so many apostate Christians laud, huh. What's truly frightening is that here in 2016, Satan's giving us in the GOP only a choice of one guy who's too dumb to live, being backed by Dominionists (Trump), and another guy whose dad LIES REPEATEDLY about the Constitution and Bible, yet his son who uses his dad as his representative, claims to be an expert on the Constitution (Cruz). And Christians? Oh, they think these two holy, good, smart, 'Christian'!

We learn from history that we learn nothing from history. And certainly we don't read Bible to know the above, even when it's as blatant and well known, as the Rev17 harlot (religion) atop the beast (polities).

brainout | 23 Mar 2016, 19:59

As if all the above weren't sardonic enough, take a gander at the syllable-counting, indexing, surgical-insertion prophecy 'sandwich' when applied to Domitian.. and to John.

Syllable 51-66 (=81-96AD) in each Matthew and Luke, go like this (for here, THAT order forms a sentence):

Matt24:2, relevant years: βλέπετε ταῦτα πάντα; ἀμὴν λέγω ὑμῖν, οὐ μὴ Luke 21:6-7,relevant yrs: ἐπὶ λίθῳ ὃς οὐ καταλυθήσεται.
7 Ἐπηρώ[τησαν]

In Greek, you leave out verbs when you want to be dramatic. Notice how each Matt and Luke are covering the same 'lines', when Christ says: not one stone will be left upon another. The Matthew text begins that 'line', and the Lukan text ends it. Plus, Luke adds the BROKEN STEM for 'to question'. But it has an interrogating meaning in Greek, such as when an authority is questionning an accused or witness. The idea of the disciples bugging Him. Intensity.

Now let's add Paul, Eph 1:6:
[katenopi]on autou en agape proorisas hemas eis hui[othesian].

I don't know if this could be more biting. Here's why:

⚠️ Domitian was known as a micromanager and builder, think of him as an early and weaker version of Diocletian. So notice the Divine Decree that NOT ONE STONE be left, leaving out even the verb 'left'! Yeah, and if you read Suetonius, that was the Senate decree when Domitian died, they wanted everything remotely related to him, torn down!

⚠️ Domitian, as you'll see in the above links, was in love with his wife and jealous of her, and she ends up conspiring for his death. The entire pattern of his life is that of a boy who felt unloved by his father and was always trying to get love, admiration, attention. So Paul's 'en agape' is pretty biting, too.

⚠️ Of course, Domitian dies with a question strongly on his mind, when being stabbed in the groin by one of his trusted amici, with his wife helping in the conspiracy.

⚠️ And he doesn't quite make it into the 'heirship' or 'sonship' he so desperately wanted, so dies mid-word. Ouch.

⚠️ But the Pauline word which perplexed me, was 'proorisas'. Until, I found this: Handbook of Early Christianity: Social Science Approaches (page 464) and The Throne Motif in the Book of Revelation (page 87).

Kill me now.

⚠️ Had done videos on Domitian some time ago, here for Paul:

And starting here for Domitian as the outcome of the Year of the Four Emperors. Material in each of the videos include more independent links.

Now look at the contrast, for John, who was exiled there 88/89 and maybe longer. Domitian wasn't persecuting Christians, but he was punishing JEWS, trying to collect taxes and find excuses to confiscate their property, esp if they were Jews but not public about it. John was a Jew, probably far away, and someone outed him in order to curry favor with whatever local magistrate; that is much more plausible than to fabricate a Christian persecution which no history corroborates.

So: same syllables in Matt-Luke, with the pink highlighted text the year John writes Rev from Patmos, 88/89AD (syllable 58-59): yeah, Patmos was a ROCK and you could see it from end to end (about 6 miles wide and 7 miles long). So how wry the same words, Look at this all? Believe it when I tell you nothing upon a stone, undemolished.

Now the wry words in Paul, note the pink highlight for 88/9 AD (last syllable of agape):

[like at court, befo]re Him
In Love, foreordained into son[ship]

Clever, huh? The LAST apostle, completed in Love, the apostle who uses LOVE as his keyword in all his writings we have. Love, of course, is 1Cor13, metaphor for Word=Head (from huperbale in 1Cor12:31).

Seriously, I shouldn't be allowed to see this and live.

brainout | 23 Mar 2016, 22:59

Just for the heck of it, lessee what happens if we try the 'sandwich' for Tiberius through Nero. Translation is loose, i.e., a verb might be translated as a noun...

Tiberius, 37AD died, so first 7 syllables in Matt24:1 and Luke 21:5, then Paul 31-37 (b.o.y.) thus:

Matt24:1 Καὶ ἐξελθὼν ὁ Ἰησοῦς ἀ[πὸ] and as Jesus was coming ou[t of]
Luke21:5 Καί τινων λεγόντων πε[ρὶ τοῦ] and some were talking ab[out]
Eph 1:3 eulogia pneumatike spiritual blessing

Okay, Jesus LEFT THE BUILDING so Tiberius did too, in the very year Christ was SUPPOSED to die, had He not been rejected, 1000 years after David's death, 4143 from Adam's Fall. In the same year, Pilate got his reprieve, since Tiberius who recalled him, had died.

And they were talking ab[out] spiritual blessings! Yeah, because He was in Heaven, just as Paul writes!

.. um, well not quite. They should have been talking about spiritual blessings while He was still with them, but instead are oooohhhhing and aaaahhhing about the Temple magnificance. When the Real Temple was standing before them, coming out and leaving the Stone One. Ooops.

Of course, Tiberius had left Rome's buildings 10 years earlier to retire on Capri, which he surely considered a 'iesous' (god-is-salvation) and a blessing. Killed there, so they were TALKING, by Caligula who considered himself a god, to save the empire for himself, which Cally baby considered a blessing, too.

So now, next four syllables = years, for Cally:

Matt 24:1 [ἀ]πὸ τοῦ ἱεροῦ [ou]t of the Temple
Luke 21:5 [πε]ρὶ τοῦ ἱεροῦ [ab]out the Temple
Eph 1:3 en tois epou[raniois] in the heav[enlies, or those in heaven]

Ahh, so Cally who considered himself a god, but not from the source of nor about, TEMPLE -- tho he wanted to put a statue of himself in THE Temple, Herod apparently talked him out of it -- so our dear profligate dies NOT QUITE with those in heaven, huh. Ouch.

Enter, bloodthirsty, capricious, smart yet dumb cuckolded Claudius, 41-54 AD (subtract 30 to get syllable range for Matt/Luke):

Matt 24:1 ἐπορεύετο, καὶ προσῆλθον οἱ μαθηταὶ continuing out, the disciples (individually) approached [Him]
Luke 21:5 ὅτι λίθοις καλοῖς καὶ ἀναθήμασιν κε[κόσμηται] quality stones, votive offerings ad[orned it]
Eph 1:3-4 [epou]raniois en Christoi kathos exzelexzato [hea]venlies in Christ as He elected [us]

Yeppie, Claudius was indeed rolled out by the troops, who came to him and he was regarded as a lifelong student, writing many histories. And he did building, make votive gifts and offerings, and was himself turned into one -- deified, even. Now, Suetonius claims he elected to banish Christians/Jews -- which to the Romans, would be about the same -- and Acts18:2 says the Jews. Note that Claudius and Herod Agrippa fell out due to Agrippa's return to Jerusalem and improving the foritifications of Jerusalem, with the latter dying about 44 AD (Acts 12, when Paul gets started as a regular missionary).

So: if in Ephesians, 'Christoi' sarcastically references that expulsion, then it would be around 47 AD, after Agrippa died. The Luke and Eph passages are written circa 58 AD, so it's retrospective sarcasm, still setting up the pattern of satire before going future.

Of course, though Father elected all men be saved, Claudius didn't apparently avail himself of that election, instead electing against the Will, and hence only part of epouraniois applies for him, too. NOT QUITE.

Next, our boy Nero, AD 54-68
Matt 24:1 αὐτοῦ ἐπιδεῖξαι αὐτῷ τὰς οἰκοδομὰς [τοῦ ἱεροῦ]. [disciples] his, to point out the buildings [of the Temple]
Luke 21:5-6 [κε]κόσμηται εἶπεν· 6 ταῦτα ἃ θεωρεῖτε ἐλ[εύσονται ἡμέραι] [ad]orned it, He says 'All these things which you see, in co[ming days]'
Eph 1:4 hemas en autoi pro kataboles kosmou einai us in Him since before the founding of the world, to be

Nero was very big on buildings, huh: fire of Rome, anyone? His own palace? Pointing out the buildings by turning Christians into torches? Oh yeah, foundation of the world! Neropolis! Center of the world, him! Wanted to rename months, too! Burn all Rome down and start over from the foundation, not since Romulus!

And all he sees will co.. ooops, Nero comes to BE an end, not holy and not in the Temple, either. End of the Claudio-Julians. Awww.

Note well, that oikodomas BEGINS at 64 AD. When Rome burned. When the Jews in Jerusalem, started rebelling a lot. Paul would likely be rounded up in the overall order by Nero to Vespasian beginning sometime in 66-67 AD -- 2Tim is 67, so no later than that -- when Nero was still in Greece (in 66, first time Nero commissions Vespasian to subdue Jerusalem). So Building of Church is in peril, too. Heh.

By contrast, Paul ended a few months before Nero did. So now lookie:

Paul pointed out the buildings of Church (i.e., Eph3:15-Chapter2).
US in Him from before the founding of the world,
The organization, all that you see, will co
-- Oh, Paul went home!


Anonynomenon | 24 Apr 2016, 21:14

Do you think that syllable 1085-1092 of my parsing of Matt 24:33a could be updating where Luke 21:36 left off???

Luke 21:36 in black, Matt 24:33 in red.

ἀγρυπνεῖτε δὲ ἐν παντὶ καιρῷ δεόμενοι ἵνα κατισχύσητε ἐκφυγεῖν ταῦτα πάντα τὰ μέλλοντα γίνεσθαι, καὶ σταθῆναι ἔμπροσθεν τοῦ Υἱοῦ τοῦ ἀνθρώπου ἴδητε πάντα ταῦτα, γινώσκετε ὅτι ἐγγύς ἐστιν ἐπὶ θύραις.....

"....and to stand before the Son of Man; You see all these things? Know that it is near, at the door.

I know that neither Luke 21:31 nor Matt 24:33a are asking a question, but when the meters are placed on top of each other, it would make sense.

What do you think?

brainout | 25 Apr 2016, 00:49

It's possible. Seems to me Luke is tracking Matt24 syllable by syllable, but only for the first 1050, cuz the remainder he already covered elsewhere or didn't elaborate on. The two SYNC at 1036, 1050, 1071, and 63, 100.

Engus doesn't mean near, it means NEXT. Door opens in Heaven as Rapture, Rev 4:1. Heh.

Anonynomenon | 25 Apr 2016, 03:07

Ok, I think what I'll do then is use the syncing between Matt 24, Luke 21, and Ephesians to figure out the best way to elide. Between the three of them, there must be an answer.

brainout | 25 Apr 2016, 13:42

Well, I'm not so sure about that. Luke uses Atticisms so would be more classical Greek in his pronunciation. Paul too. Greek changed a lot since 30 AD, and at the time Matthew was writing, they were just beginning to debate elisions. Used to be considered elegant, but the trend was to reduce them. But for those alive prior, the old habit of using elisions was still in use.

JohnDatelineMeters.htm#E has a link to a writeup about the debate.

Remember, these books were written with an eye toward their audience. The audience then, memorized orally by syllable counts, so any elisions would naturally occur and be used in the counts. It's fascinating how one can therefore resurrect the pronunciation by determining what were considered single syllables or krasis or elision. So it's like being there.

Consequently it's best to first parse BY CLAUSE and count syllables without ellision, then see based on the pattern, where diphthongs are deemed, or syllables are elided. For there will be a pattern, and the syllable counts will be meaningful relative to the text.

brainout | 03 May 2016, 03:45

I still see no need to change Luke's meter. Maybe he added 3 syllables to end at 1085 (vs. Matt24's 1082), due to Varro's overpadded by 3 years calendar (source of our BC/AD problem).. becoming law under Claudius? Still haven't solved that, either.

brainout | 12 May 2016, 09:09

Luke 21 videos will start posting on Sunday. Here's the link to the playlist, with the setting on the latest vid thus far, so it will be easier to scroll through only the Luke videos upcoming:

brainout | 13 Sep 2016, 05:40

I'm still not finding any explanation for why Luke 21 only plots the first 1050 (1085 to align with pre-Church Mill schedule). That probably means the other Bible books will 'tag' Luke, and ALL of it will be the 'sandwich' to Matt24-25. In particular, I don't know why 364 is what John's Rev uses. I fear the whole book is metered. Gag me now.

brainout | 04 Mar 2017, 04:59

Luke is clearly playing on Paul and the West, providing a tangential timeline to Matt24 through 1115 AD (that's why Luke ends 1085 but Matt24 at 1082). Much more has to be done, but the ties to Matt and Mark are now listed with some salient events. I've not yet plotted his anaphora. Am starting to do it now.

brainout | 15 Mar 2017, 12:11

Luke 21's Meter was updated, so use the link again if you want to see it, Luke21Meter.pdf. Can now download en masse from the downloads directory, DownlTips.htm.

brainout | 08 Oct 2017, 03:02

Series will resume after October 15th, with a much-more indepth 'Quantum Bible' showing all the related passages for the Constantine-Justinian I period.

Psalm 90 Meter (and variants, if you find 'em)

brainout | 19 Aug 2015, 16:25

Since it's annoying to use video pages to comment on the meter or variants in the Psalm 90 channel, this topic is reserved for discussing them here. NB: the Youtube version of these videos is less complete, but substantially the same.

I don't know when I'll have time to go back and edit or make more videos.

Now commenting can be in one place, no longer hampered by email or restricted to the video watch pages. If you want, you can also cover the 490/1000-year time grants' God's Orchestration of Time theme of Psalm 90, since that doctrine begins in Genesis. But I'm thinking maybe a whole new forum is needed for it. Let me know if you want me to make one. For all this is original research, so needs vetting (ergo the videos and the Word docs, to display the source text and conclusions from it).

For discussion here, please use Roman letters, not special Greek/Hebrew fonts, so everyone can follow what you're saying. Try to transliterate phonetically, or use the standard seminary transcriptions, again so people can follow what you're writing.

Anonynomenon | Oct 2017, 00:11

I was reparsing Psalm 15, and trying to compare syllable counts to other Hebrew meters, like Psalm 90. As I started counting syllables in Psalm 90, I realized that I couldn't get the same counts you got, nor could I tell where you elided in some spots. I decided to meter it myself. Rather than the 350 syllables you got, I got 364. As for the datelines, I got 84+7. Personally, I really don't like the idea of having to start from 'square 1' again, so I'm really hoping my parsing is wrong, but these issues do have to be sorted out.

Psalm 1 Meter

Anonynomenon | 18 Jun 2018, 23:17

Just parking this here until I have time to look closer at it.

Psalm 12 Meter

Anonynomenon | 25 Apr 2017, 02:19

I was debating some KJVO people, and wound up metering Psalm 12 in the process. They tried to use Psalm 12:6-7 to prove that the KJV bible is the only divinely inspired/preserved Word of God, so I went overboard and buried their argument with quick meter. I don't know if it was the right decision or not, but the result was this meter, so I figured I might as well share it here. I will be converting it to PDF later.

Verse 1a


לַמְנַצֵּ֥חַ עַֽל־הַשְּׁמִינִ֗ית מִזְמֹ֥ור לְדָוִֽד׃

14 Syllables (7x2)
AV Translation: "To the chief Musician upon Sheminith, A Psalm of David."

Verse 1b


הֹושִׁ֣יעָה יְ֭הוָה כִּי־גָמַ֣ר חָסִ֑יד כִּי־פַ֥סּוּ אֱ֝מוּנִ֗ים מִבְּנֵ֥י אָדָֽם׃

21 Syllables (7x3)
AV Translation: "Help, LORD; for the godly man ceaseth; for the faithful fail from among the children of men."

Verse 2-3


שָׁ֤וְא ׀ יְֽדַבְּרוּ֮ אִ֤ישׁ אֶת־רֵ֫עֵ֥הוּ שְׂפַ֥ת חֲלָקֹ֑ות בְּלֵ֖ב וָלֵ֣ב יְדַבֵּֽרוּ׃
יַכְרֵ֣ת יְ֭הוָה כָּל־שִׂפְתֵ֣י חֲלָקֹ֑ות לָ֝שֹׁ֗ון מְדַבֶּ֥רֶת גְּדֹלֹֽות׃

42 Syllables (7x6)
AV Translation: "They speak vanity every one with his neighbour: with flattering lips and with a double heart do they speak. The LORD shall cut off all flattering lips, and the tongue that speaketh proud things"

Verse 4-5a


אֲשֶׁ֤ר אָֽמְר֨וּ ׀ לִלְשֹׁנֵ֣נוּ נַ֭גְבִּיר שְׂפָתֵ֣ינוּ אִתָּ֑נוּ מִ֖י אָדֹ֣ון לָֽנוּ׃ מִשֹּׁ֥ד עֲנִיִּים֮ מֵאַנְקַ֪ת אֶבְיֹ֫ונִ֥ים עַתָּ֣ה אָ֭קוּם יֹאמַ֣ר יְהוָ֑ה

42 Syllables (7x6)
AV Translation: "Who have said, With our tongue will we prevail; our lips are our own: who is lord over us? For the oppression of the poor, for the sighing of the needy, now will I arise, saith the LORD"

Verse 5b-6


אָשִׁ֥ית בְּ֝יֵ֗שַׁע יָפִ֥יחַֽ לֹֽו׃
אִֽמֲרֹ֣ות יְהוָה֮ אֲמָרֹ֪ות טְהֹ֫רֹ֥ות כֶּ֣סֶף צָ֭רוּף בַּעֲלִ֣יל לָאָ֑רֶץ מְ֝זֻקָּ֗ק שִׁבְעָתָֽיִם׃

35 Syllables (7x5)
AV Translation: "I will set him in safety from him that puffeth at him. The words of the LORD are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times."

Verse 7-8


אַתָּֽה־יְהוָ֥ה תִּשְׁמְרֵ֑ם תִּצְּרֶ֓נּוּ ׀ מִן־הַדֹּ֖ור ז֣וּ לְעֹולָֽם׃ סָבִ֗יב רְשָׁעִ֥ים יִתְהַלָּכ֑וּן כְּרֻ֥ם זֻ֝לּ֗וּת לִבְנֵ֥י אָדָֽם׃

35 Syllables (7x5)
AV Translation: "Thou shalt keep them, O LORD, thou shalt preserve them from this generation for ever. The wicked walk on every side, when the vilest men are exalted."

There might be more subsevening in a few places, but I think most of the sevening is represented as parsed. I counted it by clause, but didn't parse it that way, to keep things simple. I'll be reviewing it later, but for now I'm just parking it here for the sake of documentation.

brainout | 29 Apr 2017, 04:14

So assuming parsed rightly, 14 21 42 42 35 35 so far. 77 doubled in palindrome (14 21 42 then 42 35).

You saw the many videos proving that 'them' does not mean 'words' in the Hebrew? It's a special construction that only refers to PEOPLE (nu ending). See Gesenius section 58. Sadly, edwardpf123 cannot read English, and he thinks that section proves him right. But when YOU read it, you'll see it refutes him.

KJV translators knew it, too. They have marginal notes which reference how they used 'them' for the nu ending BECAUSE they knew it meant people, which in English we impersonalize with 'them' rather than 'him' or 'us' (cuz there is no 3rd person plural in the Hebrew form). For I wasn't the only one trying to explain this BASIC GRAMMAR ISSUE to eddie baby, who claims he attended Berachah while I was physically there (!) yet cannot decipher case endings:

Anonynomenon | 02 May 2017, 19:27

So then, shouldn't verse 7 be translated, "you will protect us" rather than, "thou shalt preserve them"? David would then be including himself with those who are "oppressed of the poor", as translated in verse 5a...thus showing that humility is the focus, not poverty.

According my Hebrew grammar book, "Biblical Hebrew: A Compact Guide", by MIles V. Van Pelt, page 46 lists nu as a pronominal suffix, defined as us/ours.

So not only did the KJV fail to clarify the translation by context, they got the translation flat wrong.

brainout | 03 May 2017, 10:10

Yes. That's the point Jeff Benner was trying to make in his video. Gesenius Section 58 flat says that, as well: THERE IS NO THIRD PERSON PLURAL. The KJV marginal note on titsrennu says that they used English 'them' only because it's got the same idiomatic meaning then in ENGLISH, but that the term meant the people.

All this is well known stuff.. but the KJVO as always, and especially edwardpf123, can't or won't admit it.

Psalm 15 Meter

Anonynomenon | 25 Aug 2015, 22:51

I'm trying to memorize Psalm 15 in Hebrew, so I decided to meter it, since its so short. I'm pretty sure the total count is 119, but I'm not certain about the elisions. The name YWHW appears twice in this psalm. The first occurrence as Yehowah, the second occurrence as Yehwah. I don't know why they wouldn't be the same, so I went with Yehowah, and elided emeth to 'meth. The aleph in emeth is so short, its easy to swallow when reciting quickly.

brainout | 14 Oct 2017, 06:48

For verse 1, I get the same 24 using Yehwah. Here's the official parser in BW:

miz•môr lüdäwìd yühôâ mî-yägûr Bü´ohóleºkä mî|-yiš•Kön Bühar qod•šeºkä

v.4, starting at syll 67, again the official seminary parser used, I get your 83 by end of kabod, using YeHWaH
nib•zè Bü|`ênäyw nim•´äs wü´et-yir•´ê yhwh(´ädönäy) yükaBBëd niš•Ba` lühära` wülö´ yämìr

So far it seems the 119 total holds. Not sure what these values mean, tho.

Anonynomenon | 17 Oct 2017, 21:52

I attached a new version of the Psalm 15 meter. The sevening is still the same, I just made a few changes. The two occurrences of יְ֭הֹוָה are 2 syllables each, קָדְשֶֽׁךָ is now 4 syllables, and וְ֝חֶרְפָּ֗ה is now 4 syllables.

brainout | 18 Oct 2017, 16:53

I get 14 sylls after syll 33 but as 8 and 6, so no need to elide emeth.

Still proofing the rest. I think the second YehWah clause should be 10 not 9, to match the first one, and make it 84 total, a sevening matching Psalm 90. But that means eliding what follows by -1, to end with the 119. Not sure where that can be done.

Maybe here:
וְל֣אֹ יָמִֽר׃
Three syllables, not 4 (lo yamir, wa silent shewa)

Anonynomenon | 29 Oct 2017, 19:59

I posted version 3 in the OP. This time, I left the first YHWH as a stand alone clause, in the same way that you would when writing a letter to someone. Then I elided mi-yishcon, and expanded emeth back to 2 syllables to avoid confusing 'truth' with 'death'.

Revelation 17 Meter

Anonynomenon | 05 Mar 2017, 03:45

[Drum roll] 🥁

The long awaited Revelation 17 meter: Below is a rough draft. I have not taken the time yet, to look for key words or anaphora, but that's next on my list to verify the sevening. I did include some of the Aleph variants, as they seem to make the sevening work much smoother.

You're gonna love the 490 in verse 10.

brainout | 05 Mar 2017, 07:03

Okay, downloading it now, cuz I'm at a complete loss as to Luke 21, which has many anaphora keywords but I can't figure out what they tie to...

brainout | 05 Mar 2017, 08:19

You will need to know how God orchestrates Time to easily read this post. Written short summary online is here (substitute 'pdf' for 'htm' to read the Greek text); much longer one, here. Videos going through the begats and math are here. Worksheet showing the amalgamated results you can test and edit (in Excel 2003 format, so should be accessible even if you use Linux), is here. Verses used to get the worksheet, are explained here.

Testing for meter first involves the MEANING of the TOTAL. Here, that total is 847. Task is to prove it valid. If valid, then most of the metering you've done, will be right, and any errors have offsets by the time you get to the bottom.

You prove the total valid in terms of WRITER INTENT. Task is to prove the writer INTENDED the total you have. So that's what this post will attempt to show.

Intent has to be DOCTRINAL, meaning it interfaces with the text and all prior Divine writ. Since this is per Chap22 the last book of the Bible, it's a heady thing to tie to all prior Rev plus prior authors' stuff, in one chapter's meter count. Would require Divine Inspiration, huh.

So our putative total of 847, pretending it is intended, what would it mean?

Well, in Genesis 1, the meter is 1050. Basic Civilization unit, cleverly employed as a pun on when Moses writes, 1050 years after the Flood. Whole chapter is a dateline per verse (maybe also per clause, but I didn't test that much).

Psalm 90, written same year as Gen1, maps out how many 1050s there are, by counting only the 70's sandwiched in between: five of them, with the last one being 56 not 70, cuz it might not happen due to Temple Down. So that extra 14 is in the first section as 63 then 84, the two datelines. Upshot tho: originally, pre-Church, the Plan of Time was 1050x5, or 5250 years. Christ was then supposed to be born 4106 from Adam's fall, 2000 years after Jacob, then die 40 years later, leaving 54 years to 4200 from Adam's fall, at which point the final (Millennial, Ps90:4) 1050 would begin, and the 5250 would complete. After that? Eternity.

It's 57, thus: Abraham matured 53.5 years prior to the elapse of the promised 2100 for the Gentiles. So they are owed that time. Plus, due to reasons I can't yet prove fully, another 3.5 years is owed as Jacob's trouble (not sure what that refs in Jacob's time). So now, 57. But that extra 3.5 gets wiped out during Jacob's time, so back to 54. I haven't yet accounted for what offset the credit, but right now that doesn't matter cuz it ends up resurfacing (q.v.)

You find all this out in Psalm 90's meter structure, and for confirmation of that intent, Isaiah 53 plots a 1078-year calendar of 1st David's birth to last David's death, with one big revision: Christ's birth has to shorten up 3 years owing to 1Kings 6:1 Solomon starting the Temple the 4th year after David died, rather than immediately after David died. So it's still a total of 57 from when Christ is SCHEDULED to die, but starts 3 years earlier to balance to that very SCHEDULE (maybe accounted as 2.5, not sure yet).

So He's born in 4103, not 4106. So the 3-year problem theologians keep having with the Bible's dates and Christ's birth are valid, for this reason. The problem is echoed in the Roman calendar (by mistake), with Varro's errant 753 ab urbe condita 'age of Rome' date for the year Christ was born (which they were then debating, not knowing of Christ) versus Livy's 750 (google on this or just go to Augustus liked Varro. So now that same error is in all our dates, which 'just happens' (yeah right) to now coincide with the Bible's change in SCHEDULE.


For that's what we're looking at, a SCHEDULE. Be it in Genesis.. or, Revelation. SCHEDULE of Time doesn't mean it will happen ON Time.

So Moses presented the schedule: 4200+Mill of 1050, in Ps90, which equidistantly and simultaneously would have 1050 left to Messiah's birth AFTER the 350 (syllables=years) of the SUM of Ps90 finished, which stood for the period of the Judges. Which Paul confirms, in his accounting in Acts 13:20 or thereabouts. (Theologians independently also came up with that period, but I don't know how they did it.) So when Judges ends, it's 1050 BC. When Saul starts. 40 years later, David becomes king at age 30, so it's easy to know his birth was 1040, hence when Solomon starts building the Temple in 1Kings 6:1, David woulda been 80 years old, so died age 77 (not 70, as scholars claim since they look at Josephus not Bible).

So oh! 😱 Now Christ can't be born ON TIME?? Deadline of time is now 1000 years after DAVID'S DEATH, which is THREE YEARS SHORT!! 😱 Cuz the Day of the Lord can't end before the Last David is BORN!

So Isaiah 53 very deliberately tags the entire meter structure of Psalm 90, to show the update. First 77 syllables, used in the genealogies of Matthew 1 (42) and Luke 3 (77) respectively, are David's life, confirmed by David himself writing at age 77 per his own dateline meter in 2Sam23.

Here's a pair of short videos I did on that; use Isa53Map.pdf to follow the revised chronology:

So we have Bible confirmation that Gen1 meter is deliberate, so too Psalm 90 and Isaiah 53, since other Bible writers use and build on, the same meter.

Isaiah 53, however, is only 462 syllables. There are two off-books hiatuses in his prophetic meter, so he can sum to the actual historical time distance from First David's Birth to last David's death:

You need all that info to grasp Daniel 9's prayer meter, and God's metered reply (docs are better than the videos, so look in the vid descriptions)..who tags Isaiah 53 to integrate it with the new direct revelation he got from God, since the Man of Time in Daniel 2, 7, updates Isaiah 53, Ezekiel, etc. So Daniel 9's prayer is also metered.. at 750-8, standing for 750 sevens=5250 years - 56. He runs two timelines concurrently to show the jurdicial cause of Temple Down due to Manasseh, keying to Isaiah 53 starting at Temple Down Isaiah 53:4's end, syllable 203 (excluding 252 ellipsis, which is off-books for his own accounting and symmetry to Psalm 90 meters).

So Daniel repackages the meter to show a) yes, what Isaiah predicted is fulfilled, so now will God allow the Temple to be rebuilt since 49 years of the non-observed sabbaticals (Daniel 9's first dateline, means missed sabbaticals since Rehoboam, when you x7 to get total real years elapsed)? Cuz b) another 7 years are due ON that 49, so how can THEY be paid? That's what Daniel is asking, as he knows his petition is about whether the WORLD can go on living.

Well, God's reply in Daniel 9:24-27 shows via Messiah's time EXTENDING the Time during HIS OWN LIFETIME, can those seven years play; so, God's metered reply to Daniel puts those extra seven years as.. TRIBULATION. So the first seven if and when paid, can trigger the second to be paid, so the time owed the Gentiles can be fulfilled as well as those extra sabbatical years now accruing on the elapsed 49.


Thus you have the SCHEDULE BALANCING precedence for Church: MESSIAH DYING EARLY means some kind of time extension can only happen IN HIM, so unless a NEW BODY is created IN HIM.. the world ends. So all the IN HIM verses in the NT are Rapture verses, for HIS BODY has to COMPLETE before Jewish Time can resume. So you see, the Rapture doctrine is all over the NT, but its keywords are missed, since the dummies used lunar years rather than solar, when accounting the 62 weeks in Daniel 9. Oh well.

So now you know why the only virgin apostle, Paul -- was obsessed with equating Church to pregnancy (Greek keyword Pleroma, means to fill up a ship or a woman with 'cargo') every chance he got (Gal 4:4, :19, Rom 8:10-19, etc, using musterion keyword as a synonym for pregnancy and mothering.. which preterists find a mystery since they are carnal). Christ is PREGNANT with us, so when we are DELIVERED, Jewish time can resume, theme of Hebrews, esp Hebrews 11:39-40 (which I now bet Luke or Mark wrote). So instead of the lame KJV 'fullness of times' you should translate it the PREGNANCY of times, about to deliver at ANY time, last trimester. Which, the prolifer will never understand, since they can't even read the sequence of Gen2:7. But I digress...

Complex, huh. But beautiful. As you can see, the biggest takeaway is that INTENT of BALANCING TIME is really evident in the meters.

So: if unlike the scholars you actually did the math right, the 1000th anniv of David's death is 37AD. That's the end of Isaiah 53, too. That's the end of Daniel 9:26, too, in EXPLICIT TEXT. But instead, the dippy Dispies go with The Coming Prince by Sir Robert Anderson (a 19th century book).. using LUNAR YEARS versus the Bible's command to use SOLAR years in Exodus 12 (Passover is Israel's birthday, can't hit your birthday annually EXCEPT using SOLAR years). So they get the math wrong.

Thieme did that too, but always questionned the result he got (end of Daniel series). So then one must hallucinate the 476 as 483 (476 solar years equals 483 lunar), and then hallucinate that the 'king' rather than God did the decreeing for rebuilding Jerusalem, and then hallucinate that rebuilding only the walls is rebuilding the whole city.. so can shoehorn all these errors into a claim that Artaxerxes I the Persian king over Nehemiah, issued some decree (of which there is none, Bible shows Nehemiah was merely granted permission, and the walls were rebuilt in 52 days, see Nehemiah 6:15). Thereby getting ALL the math of Daniel 9, WRONG.

Ooops. So for centuries, the theologians, whether preterist or Dispy, missed the obvious fact that Christ dies SEVEN YEARS EARLY. So that extra 7 on the 49, is NOT made up, so the Tribulation is EXTRA seven years, so the Temple must REMAIN the extra 40 years to balance Israel's time and yet Church must start when Christ dies or THERE WILL BE NO JUSTIFICATION FOR GRANTING TIME AT ALL.

So where are we? Christ thus actually dies 7 years early, at 4136 after Adam's Fall, which you'd know if you did the begats.. it's not from creation, but his fall, when God started to NUMBER HIS DAYS, Genesis 3:22 (mimmenu, clever way to say Adam is BORN SEPARATED from God due to his fall).

So what happens to the 5250 originally planned? Well, since any new time must be IN Christ, HE himself announced how that new time would play, in Matt24-25. When you crunch the math, you get the new total:

Yeah, but that's in Talmud (garbled version, 2100 should be used not 2000). How to prove it in Bible, other than Matt24-25? Aha.

Well, first, Eph1 and Luke 21 both play to it, but for shorter periods of time, covering the fall of Rome-West. Mark 13 plays to it, covering the fall of Rome-East, since there will be TWO Romes, starting @Constantine. Which future guy, all three chapters focus on, as did Matt24-25, by means of anaphora keywords which nest like Russian dolls, using Trinity meter (Paul) or sevening meter like Matt24-25 does (Luke 21 and Mark 13).

Which, John knows and plays to, in his text and meter. How do we know? Well, look:

So now, back to 847, Rev17 total meter. You'll notice, if your eyes haven't glazed over by now -- and they will, mine do too whenever I do this meter stuff -- you'll notice, that Daniel 9's total based on Psalm 90's total for Time, was 5250, expressed as 750 sevens, but 56 were still in doubt, the sevening version of 57 years (54+3.5 owing to Solomon's delay in building 1st Temple, no longer due to something in Jacob's life). So, Daniel's ending meter was 750-8=742.

John's 847, is much higher, but lookie: 1050 sevens=7350. So why 847 not 1050? Aha. Let's break it down, too:

So John balances to the syllable counts in Matt24-25, Ephesians, and the first-1050 offshoots in Luke 21 for the West, and Mark13 in the East, all by means of that same 847. Which helps the reader know yes, this text really is from God, who could craft the words so well to balance time from Genesis to Revelation? See, Scripture is self-identifying. You don't need some scarlet beast of prelates puffing themselves up (and getting it all WRONG anyway) to tell you what books are God's Word.

So now you have the final word on when the Rapture happens: WHEN IT HAPPENS, methusaleh. Can't predict when, as 'Year' is a metaphor, to parallel Noah's days in Das Boot. His days were literal, that's why we use YEAR; his days were precedent FOR our year, namely the fact he was born on Passover but made to wait 57 days before entering the boat, details here.

Even a preliminary review of the Flood Account in Genesis 6-8, shows God stressing a SOLAR YEAR: namely, one based on Noah's birthday. So why does God do this, and what IS Noah's Birthday? Complicating the question, is the fact that both the Hebrew and the Greek texts are corrupted in different places; but where one text is corrupt, the other one is accurate. So the quest is to find, which is which. The video didn't yet resolve that, but in the pdf link below, you'll find a reconciliation. For Noah was IN the boat 365 days. On that 365th day (not 375, Genesis 7:11 should read 27th, not 17th, see LXX), he exits. So he ENTERED the Ark 57 days after his 600th birthday, and LEAVES it 57 days after his 601st birthday. So he was born on what we'll end up knowing, as Passover, when Christ was Crucified (the Jewish calendar wasn't intercalated yet for the year, so He eats the Passover four days prior, but IS the Passover just as Bible says, 1Cor5:7). Get the pun? We can sail in the Boat of Life (and Boat to Heaven), because He became Our Ark.

By this we are to know the precedence for our own 'year', post-Flood.

So the video is now outdated, but its sleuthing methodology is still useful. It's linked to the video description in my Youtube 'Pass the Salt' videos (Pass the Salt, Bypass the Flood!). Its CORRECTION (from 375 to 365) is here: FloodChronoREVISED.pdf.

Turns out the math of the Flood dates in Genesis 7 and 8 (corrected for the LXX, since the Hebrew is corrupt in some places also) show Noah's birthdate on the same as what would become PASSOVER.

This Flood Year sets precedence. Israel knew that, too. You can buy a dissertation by Jack P. Lewis on Amazon (search on his name plus 'Noah' and 'Flood'), tracing from extant literature, how the ancient Jews knew the Flood set precedence for the definition of 'Year', and that's why Israel's calendar is constructed as it is IN BIBLE (not in Judaism, which has garbled the dates). His dissertation draws no conclusion; so treat it as a survey of Jewish understanding, during those ancient times.

This 'Year' matters, as it's SOLAR, never lunar. Yet though Jews (and Christians) knew this precedence, they instead reverted to accounting Time in lunar or soli-lunar years, even until today. That's why all scholars get Daniel 9:25-27's accounting, WRONG. There are an extra seven years left out, because they all use lunar years to reconcile, though God never does.

Daniel, Mary, Paul and Peter all use this Noahic SOLAR 'Year' meaning, to construct their Time Meters (in Daniel 9, the Magnificat, Eph1:3-14, 1Peter1:1-12). Paul in particular structures his meter to create a 'Year of Church' prophecy about how Church will go apostate, and stay in the Groundhog Day of Daniel 9:26 (434 syllables=years, ending at the rise of Odovacer). Peter plays on that prophecy, updates it; John will also, in Revelation.

So the FLOOD is the precedence for the 200-year and 120-year trends taking place at the end of each 490. For this is how God orchestrates DISASTER Time. For thought, is contagious. Leviticus 26 and Deut 28, play live, in history. Precedented on, Noah and The Flood.

So all those date-setters can go do something else, for any day can be YOUR deathday anyhow. But the point is, GROW UP cuz you don't know the day or hour of your death, or of the Rapture, and it always CAN be TODAY, Hebrews 3. Bible takes a long time to learn, and learning it IS the GOOD that GOD makes of you, as HE likes hearing YOU learn so YOUR thinking becomes LIKE CHRIST's.. since you are IN Him, so the goal is for HE to be in YOU as you are in HIM, Galatians 4:19, etc.

Now, Church is not learning Him. They learn religion. They learn Works. So FAKE CHURCH in Rev17 is a continual trend Satan deploys to SLOW DOWN TIME and hopefully, as he did with Israel, get Church to REJECT Christ before all the humans Christ paid to be IN Him.. are born/developed. To ABORT, is Satan's goal. So all the prolifers busy aborting the Word of God to drool over Caesar, are rejecting Christ. So Satan wins with them. And with his Fake Church as here shown in Rev17, he can keep his own jail sentence in the future.

Got it?

brainout | 05 Mar 2017, 13:38

So now the next q: how do I know the 847 is x7? Easy-peasy: meters stack. So 847-364= (drum roll please) 483. Sound familiar? Like in Daniel 9:26, all but the Trib counted? They're called 'weeks' (literally, 'sevens'), so x7. Duh.

brainout | 05 Mar 2017, 17:51

Now, to the variants. You counted kai in v.10, and ten in v.13. The kai is not in any actual ms of value; TR used it, and that's not an ms but a critical edition. So including it won't wash with the scholars.

The ten is in the first Aleph but only a few others. To include it stresses the type of authority given, as SEPARATE, so that's a doctrinal difference. It's more tenable, but scholars could easily dispute it, since it's in so few other manuscripts.

The bigger reason to exclude it, is grammar and context of prohibited oneness. Granville Sharp rule has one article covering more than one item to prove the two are related, so power and authority really are not separated: so no ten should be there, as lack of separation of power/authority is the problem stressed. The illegal unity is already indicated by the ten fronting dunamin. Same idea as pastor-teacher, no second article means it's all the same person/thing. So should be ten dunamin kai exousian to show all-in-one, which is the abomination being warned against.

BTW, that's what felled Rome: Augustus was all in one, no succession plan, and therefore the only succession that resulted was the army.

So now:
if we leave out kai in v.10, change sophia back to its classical three syllables which have no Hebrew counterpart so would not be susceptible to slurring, then v.9 is 449, and all the others are 1 higher till 10b, which is now one lower so still tallies to 490, tho I'm not sure it should. But for now, could leave it be.

John uses sophia a lot, it has a well-established name and Greek lit is full of it; but it's only used that once in Rev17.

As for v.13, leaving ten out, syllables from 13b through end 14 go down one. Remove elision from 15a's ἃ εἶδες because the sounds are too different, and the alliteration is intended (three a's, unholy, alphaprivative negative sound). So then 15a ends up staying 684.

There might be other changes needed, but those two would at least be needed since the mss nor grammar support including them. Variants I gave you have to be mentioned, but I didn't see one which ought to be included, on grammar grounds.

Biggest point to remember: don't force a sevening. Especially here, since frankly the sevening should only occur at the end (guessing). If it naturally occurs, then by the clause counts you can see why and where, cuz usually the writers pair clauses to have same syllable counts as a type of tagging.

Text sevens for a lot of different reasons, not merely to show spiritual growth. Here, the point is NO growth: but the Plan of God still works. So yeah, there might be a 490, 560 etc. to denote the Time Allotment, but we don't yet know if this is predicting specific future history like the Matt24-25/Eph1/Luke21/Mark 13 did. Maybe it does, in which case the meters will 'tag' those passages by sometimes having the same values. But don't force that, either. Just let the meter reveal itself as you do it first assuming no ellisions, unless you get tongue-tied without them. Then see what pattern results.

This is hard to do. It's tedious work. Had we all been raised on the meter since childhood, it would instead be fun.

brainout | 05 Mar 2017, 20:08

There could be more than one way to meter it. If I remove 28 of the elisions, it still sevens at 28 higher and then v.1 sevens at 21, from the getgo. We don't get the 490, maybe, but I'm not sure that's the point. I forget if John used 21 before, but other writers did. The 56 would be lost, but a second dateline results of 70 (68 becomes 70), and the two still sum 91, as they should.

But that isn't to imply the alternative is right or better. In fact, the 19 you get at 17:1 is 89-19=70, Temple Down. John always measures from Temple Down in his first clause, whether it sevens or not; he then piggybacks to measure from the last time he wrote, to tie back to his own letters; again whether it sevens or not.

Gonna play with it some.

Anonynomenon | 05 Mar 2017, 20:10

Quote @brainout

The ten is in the first Aleph but only a few others. To include it stresses the type of authority given, as SEPARATE, so that's a doctrinal difference. It's more tenable, but scholars could easily dispute it, since it's in so few other manuscripts.

The bigger reason to exclude it, is grammar and context of prohibited oneness. Granville Sharp rule has one article covering more than one item to prove the two are related, so power and authority really are not separated: so no ten should be there, as lack of separation of power/authority is the problem stressed. The illegal unity is already indicated by the ten fronting dunamin. Same idea as pastor-teacher, no second article means it's all the same person/thing. So should be ten dunamin kai exousian to show all-in-one, which is the abomination being warned against.

I was thinking that exact thought. I really didn't want to add it in the first place, but I got to point where I thought something was missing.

So, I'll:

  1. expand σοφίαν (I was hesitant about eliding that too),
  2. drop τὴν and καὶ.
  3. trade out the three occurrences of ἃ εἶδες for μίαν (maybe? but Matt 24 didn't do it).
  4. then maybe expand βλασφημίας (I was hesitant about that too).


Let me know what you think of those possibilities. I'll try it later, as it will take some time to change the totals.

brainout | 05 Mar 2017, 20:25

Do what you think best. Seriously. The real first purpose of doing this at all, is to build the bi-directional connection between God and you, which is John 14:26 in operation. To get used to knowing what He's directing, rather than a bad dinner, the demon boys trying to interfere 'from the peanut gallery' as the Col. used to put it, etc.

It's trial and error, hard cuz we're trying to RECOVER long lost knowledge.

BTW, your pdf looks STUNNING on my Android phone. I'm using XODO to download and read it. It has no ads.

Lemme give you an example of what John is doing here, a rolling dateline chain like Moses did in Gen1:

Hi, I'm writing you 19 years after Mark wrote his gospel, 19th year after Temple Down (70 AD+19, but John's still at year 18, anniv hasn't happened yet)
which (70 AD) was 44 years after The Lord began His Ministry,
which Ministry (27 AD) ended at his Death Age 33, which was 56 years ago,
so now He shoulda been age 91 at Tribulation Start but (cuz He's 92 when John writes), it didn't start on time and that's why I'm writing you.

John also switches between Lord's Age year and Adamic year.

brainout | 06 Mar 2017, 15:01

So now look: Rev17:1, first clause metered at 19. Stands for the 19th year after Temple fell, AND 19 years after Mark wrote his Gospel. Cuz that's the last book which dealt with prophecy, prior to John.

56th year since Christ died at age 33, at start April. Chislev 88 AD is when John writes, cuz he's writing just BEFORE Christ turns age 92. It will become 89 AD in 28 days.

This becomes handy then. To balance to Matthew21/Luke21/Mark13 meter, you just add 56. Cuz all of them dated their chapters to 30 AD/Christ age 33 for the content.

brainout | 06 Mar 2017, 16:45

When you're in the mood, you gotta reparse verses 1, 5, 16-18 by clause. Point is to find where the sevening really is, if any, but bigger point to find where John ties to Matt24, Eph1, Luke21, Mark 13 meters. Since John is writing 56 years after them (using Christ age 33), his meters will end up being 56 less than theirs, to tie. In the case of tying to Paul, John's meters have to be converted to AD first, by usually adding 87 or 88 (depending on beginning or ending of year in the meter he's tying to).

847 is the sum of 364 in Chap 1 (cuz John gaslights his meters) plus (drum roll please) 483, so he's playing on the meaning of 69 weeks. So all he need do is tag the METERS of the prior prophetic chapters.

It's not that he doesn't tie at all as if a timeline, cuz 847+89AD (since he writes at the end of 88) is 936 AD, when OttoI comes to power over Germany, and shortly thereafter begins an attempt of marriage alliance with Constantine VII, who was illegally under the thumb of Nikephoros.

Moreover, at John's Rev17:15 syll 711, end of καὶ τὰ δέκα κέρατα, that's when Charlemagne is crowned head of the revived Holy Roman Empire by a pope newly disenchanted by Irene running Byzantium for her kid Constantine VI. He had at least 10 kids&grandkids&greatgrandkids who became kings; Bible likens 'horns' to progeny.

Before that, the other big emperor Matt24/Luke21/Matt13 (especially) targeted, was Justinian, who ruled 527-565, and explicitly aimed to revive Rome. So lookie here: start of his reign is marked in Rev 17:8 as the beast who will come (439+88=527 in AD). He makes Byzantine Empire reach its widest extent by 565 (with territories lost quickly after he dies), so could you say seven kings under him then (John ends 477=565 just after hepta in 17:11)? Sure. More than seven, depends on how you package them. But that's not so much the point as he explicitly aimed to revive Rome so it's a good posterboy example for what John's being given, if the angel is doing a timeline.

Same as what the parallels in Matt24, Luke21, Matt13 say, with different text. These two events of Justinian and Charlesmagne are anaphoric centers tagged by Luke and Mark to Matt24 and each other; so it makes sense John would tag them, too. Actually, Otto is also tagged in the 910 meter which Luke and Mark share.

So look at the text in Rev17:
17:5 Diocletian and Constantine
:9-10 Justinian I
:15-18 Carolingians
:18 Otto, at verse end (just comes to power)

Now, the Carolingians did a massive reform at education wanting everyone to get Bible, and put Alcuin in charge of it, but still they let themselves be beholden though warily, to the Western Pope. Their idea was the same as Constantine's, to sponsor the religion to control it. So really that's the backdrop on how to read Rev17, the kings yes use religion for their power, but also to control it so it doesn't seize power over them. But of course eventually the religion will seize power, i.e., the little horn in Daniel 7 as elaborated on in Daniel 11.

So now parsing by clause is much more important, as it will help us see how John tags the before and after of each.

brainout | 07 Mar 2017, 15:25

LOL you're right about 490 at verse 10. Changes the identity of the five fallen, maybe, to Babylon, Persia, Greece, Constantine, Justinian (which JUST HAPPENS prior to v.10). And there 'is' someone who replaces J then, ruling until the 578 where the 490 ends (Justin II).. and the one yet to come will still be, plus whoever the Trib anti-Christ is, since this is GroundHog Day prophecy.

Add 88 to the numbers, see for yourself. J dies 565 (just before eisin in v.9).

Cleverer still, because J lived so long, Rev17:10's 490 tags that number in Matt, which antedates Justinian by SEVEN YEARS (equidistance). Justinian built the Nea Theotokos (google it), a temple to MARY atop the HoH. Patriarch of Jeru started to build it 7 years earlier but hadn't enough money.

Cleverer still, since John's writing in the 7th year prior to Mill (6 years remain, but starting the count with 88, count it as 1 on your fingers, 94 is 7th), so he's adjusting for pre-Church Mill date. So 490 years from when he writes ties to both post-and-pre-Church Mill 490s. So OF COURSE the next clause is seven syllables.

Exhausting but fulfilling.

Anonynomenon | 09 Mar 2017, 07:06

Ok. I reparsed and changed some elisions in Rev 17. The new document is in the opening post of the thread.

brainout | 09 Mar 2017, 08:57

Looks good. Still need to parse 8a, 9b, 12b into clauses. Thank you! It's amazing how this fits the history.

brainout | 09 Mar 2017, 10:15

Revised the pdfs to ref Rev17 meter, not fully but enough to see the wit,

Just search on 'Rev' to find the tags. They won't have to change after you reparse by clause, since I counted the tags by meter number in Rev17, like I'd bet the ancients all did.

brainout | 09 Mar 2017, 10:48

Constantine's death is at BdeLUGma, so he's deemed an abomination ΒΔΕΛΥΓΜΑΤΩΝ

brainout | 10 Mar 2017, 08:09

I think I'm gonna de-Hebraise the meter to see what happens. Seems that the intent is to get to Otto I's crowning as Holy Roman Emperor, since he's the quintessential Daniel 11 making-marriage-alliances guy. Charlemagne was, too, but not so strongly. OttoII was married off to a Byzantine princess named Theophanu who ended up being regent to her son, Otto III. That kid (and he died at 21, no issue) actually literally tried to revive Rome.

The other reason why I'm doing it, is that the angel seems to be using Classical Greek. So I wanna see what difference it makes.

brainout | 12 Mar 2017, 12:43

Still working on the classical-Greek style of syllable counts in Rev17. It doesn't seven AT ALL after 252, until the end; when it ends, it tags a WOMAN who would be called a 'scarlet empress'. Moreover, the Rev17 meter when converted to AD and then compared to Mark 13, precisely tags Mark13's meter at least three times. To the same YEARS. Same rulers as in his nested anaphora for huios and kurios, but John's using gune and therion.

Oh: and like Mark, John consigns a ruler's death or even accession to 'kai' (cutting off kaiSER). Really biting.

I've not tracked any tags in Matt24 and Eph1, Luke 21, nor have I yet looked for other anaphora keywords.

Rev17 becomes so clear once the meter is used to derive the years.

brainout | 15 Mar 2017, 11:48

Redid the meter assuming Classical Greek pronunciation (elision and hiatus), Rev17Meter.pdf. Also redid the others to show Rev17 tagging, though the Rev17 has the accumulated tags to these others, highlighted in yellow:

Also annotated the ties Rev17 makes to Ephesians 1, tho I didn't annotate John's 231, 238, and 252 tags to Eph, yet. Not sure why those tags are used.

Haven't also yet populated Rev17 with all the historical benchmarks he's making. So check back here later for redownloading the docs as they will be further revised and the names will remain the same.

All are now available in the downloads directory (public access), DownlTips.htm

Still have to reconcile how John benchmarks the 490, 560, cuz it seems he's doing it 4 ways so it won't seven but will reconcile. The point of the chapter is that there is little to no growth after Constantine, so he's avoiding sevening. It sevens at the end on a pun of the two Theophanu gals who both end up Empresses, and are both related to at least ONE Emperor, themselves. Very witty.

There are many intra-doc links to outside ONLINE writeups on the people tagged, so you can see the ties and the text within one document.

brainout | 15 Mar 2017, 22:35

Examples of how Rev17 reconciles to 490s by his meter counts:
403=491 AD, start of the new 490 post Christ's BIRTH, like Paul framed his. I wondered about that.

438=432+6. Reconciles to 520 AD, a 490 from Christ's death (432+88 AD when John writes) and to the historical 490 that should have begun had there been no Church (+6 to get to 4200FAF, then start 490 over again). That one I tracked in GeneYrs.xls.

479=567 AD, which is 560 from Christ's BIRTH again, but adjusted for the extra 6 as done above (7 when starting at the new year after close).

496 Blatant 490+6 to tie to the 490 beginning after 4200 FAF, from when he writes, 6th year before 4200.

503=591 AD, 2nd 490 start after voting period which began 520 AD, so measured as a 1050 from the Cross.

This way he reconciles to the 490s without sevening the text. Cuz the text is about the harlot, so shouldn't seven.

He does seven, but every time he does up to 252, he matches someone's text in prior Divine writ, with that number. I'm not sure how his text interacts with what he tags, yet.

John is something of a nerd about multiple reconciliations. I noticed that but didn't understand it when seeing Rev1; maybe now I'll be able to figure it out.

brainout | 16 Mar 2017, 08:09

I tested the meter assuming no elisions or hiatus since the raw total is 875; all the tags, with, keyword ties to history disappear. Classical Greek then, as Rev is a play done in Classical Greek tradition, and Fake Church rules now and in the Trib, so no Hebraisms.

So if there are any remaining errors, they cancel out often.

brainout | 19 Mar 2017, 17:24

Have fully populated the meter entries for the classical-Greek assumption of Rev17 meter now, Rev17Meter.pdf. Also redid the others, so in the above post their links need to be used, again. Now I feel comfortable about the meter being mostly correct, but am still puzzling over 868's meaning. It's probable that he has another 56 in ellipsis after it, which would make the total equal 560 +364, but since he's writing in 88 AD I don't know what he's trying to say with that total.

Turns out the Great City is indeed Constantinople, not only because it's where Rev 17:18 occurs (and there is no other Roman Empire at that point, the HRE was in flux until 962); but because VIKINGS NAMED IT THAT, per J.B. Bury, The Christian Roman Empire and the Foundation of the Teutonic Kingdoms, Location 957 of my Kindle copy of his Chapter I, should be half way through chapter. As Bury explains, the Northmen called it Miklagard, which means Great City.

In short, Rev17:18 predicted what the Vikings would call it, and is very PRECISE as to what the Great City is, cuz the meter for those words is 939AD (end clause), time of Constantine VII and the Viking explorations; same period is the anaphoric center in Mark 13 (syll 910) tagging Luke 21. The same text as in the clause just prior in Mark, is in Matt24, just after its own clause ending in 901.

So that's a pretty clear definition of what the GREAT CITY is.

brainout | 25 Mar 2017, 00:02

Update: I'm comfortable with Rev17 and Mark 13 meter meanings, though there is more to flesh out as to why they mark those kings so satirically. But Luke 21 and Matt24-25 connections still elude me, even though I generally know what they tag.

Am reading up on history to see what possible clues might turn up.

brainout | 10 Apr 2017, 18:45

Revelation 17 Sarcasm Tour videos are up, start here:

brainout | 17 Jul 2017, 20:08

Went back to re-examine Rev1 meter. It so happens that the 42 dates backwards to Claudius expelling Jews from Rome (45 AD, ref'd in Book of Acts), and the 70 another prior expulsion but Tiberius did it (19 AD, and they went to Sardinia). So John equates his being on Patmos, which was also due to expulsion. Not clear how it related to Domitian, but D did do a witch hunt in Rome proper. John wasn't there. Usually when these things happen, the rest of the Empire variantly has its local rulers expel Jews/Christians (not under Emperor orders but as an excuse or to curry favor or avoid being accused themselves). Probably wasn't just one time per Roman expulsion, either.

Ties to the text, since the theme is about how Jews and Christians are to be persecuted, the meter theme functions as an elab on what Christ said in Matt24. Clever how the text is matched to the meter, first being 'signified by sending' (for Claudius, since that's what an expulsion also is), and 'who testifies to the Word of God' (meaning John, thereby tying his own current exile to the Tiberius time, could be autobiographical of his family origin).

brainout | 24 Jul 2017, 17:36

Update: I missed another anaphora, blepw/horaw, in Rev17. There are seven of them, and distances between each occurrence of the verb are also divisible by 7. I checked the timeline of each one, and John uses the anaphora like Mark did, to denote emperor death but with stress on what the SUCCESSOR SEES. The emperors tagged were

Verse 6-8 is an anaphoric center, meaning history goes full-circle, and the trend at the beginning of it (v.6, Constantine's sons' warring).. renews. History proves this out, too, every 490 years (depending on which 490, the contiguous qualifying ones, or the 490+70+490 historical ones, for sure always the latter).

What's notable about the years marked by the placements of the verbs, is that obscure but important changes RELATIVE TO THE REV17 THEME, take place then. For example, Charlemagne died in 814, but Louis wasn't CROWNED BY THE POPE until 816. Charlemagne's wife died just before he's tagged (she had a de factor co-emperor role in his absence, bore him 9 kids and died at age 29 in childbirth).

Most importantly, the timeline in Rev17, which stops at the 956 marriage of Romanos II and Theophanu in the East, is the cause of another Theophanu (BORN THE SAME YEAR), who ends up marrying Otto II in the West. That matters, cuz Otto I's big claim to fame was the subordination of the monks and other clerics to serve the STATE. There's also the myth of Christ coming back (Last Emperor Myth, now a big thing in RUSSIA), which accounts for the timing of Charlemagne's crowning BY THE POPE as the replacement Basileus (replacing Irene). Idea was they expected Christ to return so were trying to unify Church and State for that reason.

Not much different between the US Christians backing Trump and the #ThirdRome Russians backing Putin, today. The latter practice persecution of non-Orthodox Christians. So too, back in those prior years denoted per blepw/horaw anaphora.

I'll have to add more videos to integrate the import of these added anaphora.

brainout | 03 Aug 2017, 10:52

The 'Quantum Bible' subseries starts with Rev17, on the anaphoric center, here:

It CHANGES the prior reviews of Rev17, cuz I didn't notice the importance of Marcian through Anastasius until doing the Quantum subseries (which is still ongoing). REAL CLEAR TIE to 490 in John, but the kicker is the NAME of the Emperor at the time of the 490 change: ANASTASIUS (lit., 'of the Resurrection'). Which is even more remarkable, as the guy didn't come to power until late in life, had been extraordinarily religious prior, ADOPTED that name when coming to power in 491 (!) so how could he not KNOW the meter? He wouldn't know Bible if it bit him!

Prior Rev17 coverage in the very long playlist is marked off in vid numbers 96-102, then Sarcasm tour starting at 124.Table of Contents, here: Matt24Meter

Sorry it's so long, but we didn't know what we were getting into when starting with Matt24-25, so the import keeps morphing, with new info.

brainout | 10 Aug 2017, 04:44

UPDATE: Quantum Bible videos are up through Justinian as the anti-Christ posterboy, demo'd in Episodes 9-10 (very long, but very wry given J's actual history). Important comments in each video provide more links to demo the text from external sources. Point is to know HOW to do this proofing, not so much what 'I' say is the meaning. For the meter''s EXISTENCE, is provably valid. My interp of it, can be argued.

Next will be Justin II, but it will be awhile now before I can do more of the videos, as I'm in my work season.

brainout | 24 Sep 2017, 00:35

Next in the QB series will show all six chapters intersecting on the same Rev17:6-8, but I'm not yet ready to post the videos.

brainout | 08 Oct 2017, 01:52

I'll resume posting Youtube videos after October 15th. Will do a much more sophisticated Quantum Bible using ALL the passages (Matt, Eph, Luke, Mark Rev), then.

Just how harloty was Justinian I?

brainout | 01 Apr 2017, 19:15

Since Rev17:9 names Justinian I derisively as the 2nd of the posterboy harlots trying to unite Church and State, it should be a research topic whether and how that is true. Here's the time-metered Rev17 text: Rev17Meter.pdf. It's also in doc form, in DownlTips.htm but you need BW9 fonts, to read/edit the Greek, which was pasted from Bibleworks 9 and is copyrighted. Non-Greek text is not copyrighted, and the thing is still in draft (I need to parse thru Rev19, which is all one chapter in Greek).

Raw data is here: Ephesians1REPARSED.htm; load page then search on 'Blume's' (include apostrophe) to reach the links for classical translations and Latin original ms of the Justinian Code. All are really annoying to read, mostly not searchable. So you have to know the Code's organization to even begin to locate what you seek.

Easier, is Fordham's Medieval Sourcebook: The Institutes, 535 CE and you can search it.

Arguing con the common (and quite understandable) claim that Justinian Code was anti-semitic, is this interesting JSTOR article by Catherine Brewer: THE STATUS OF THE JEWS IN ROMAN LEGISLATION: THE REIGN OF JUSTINIAN 527-565 CE

You can join JSTOR for free, optionally read for free online, or buy the articles in pdf. If you belong to an institution your institution probably already has a subscription, so you'd have no limits if you use the institution subscription. I really like JSTOR.

For an overview (which like anything else will be biased), History of the Jews in the Byzantine Empire

Shorter, informal version: Did Byzantium persecute the Jews? Sep 17 2010

We all know Christ said John 18:36, so to REGULATE RELIGION in any way should be obviously immoral, illegal, unscriptural and unspiritual. There was no law like that in the OT, either (remember, there were Temple prostitutes in the Holy Temple during Manasseh's day?) -- so clearly the Constantine et seq. emperors are anti-christs and well worth Rev17's condemnations.

Problem is, the folks behind Trump call themselves 'Seven Mountains' and have the same goals as Justinian's. Just look up that term in Youtube, hear them talk for yourself (i.e., Rafael Cruz, Lance Wallnau, Pat Robertson, James Dobson, etc ad nauseum).

So this attempt at uniting Church and State is a threat to US right now. Thus, warrants research into the past.

Malachi Datelines

brainout | 01 Oct 2016, 02:55

These are prelim results. I was trying to understand why Zeph 1 benchmarked to 418BC at syll 224, and stumbled onto Malachi.

Mal 1:1 dateline is 14, I just counted sylls on my fingers (so be skeptical, maybe).
Mal 1:2 dateline is 35, same method.
Turns out, the 14 (as years after)=ENDING of Nehemiah's dateline, which is STATED IN THE TEXT, so I didn't count sylls.
The 35 (as years after) = how long Malachi's ministry lasts since start of Neh, again stated in the text, so didn't count sylls. OR, Malachi could be using the 35 to mean '35 years to the end of the historical 70 voting period window' like Daniel's count does, in Dan9:15 and 17, ref'ing the same 446 prospectively (which is 21 years into the 70-year voting period).

Since Malachi's the last book of OT, he basically brackets his own book: hi, this chapter 1 starts 14 years after Nehemiah's book ended, and it spans the next 35 years. Which we know, given the dateline in Malachi 2:17 (start of its chap 3 in Hebrew). Cute.

Sum? 49. Hahahaha, plays on Daniel 9:4 and 9:26 TEXT simultaneously (the seven sevens in Dan9:26), which would take you to Canon completion end of voting period, 397BC.

What's the dateline in Mal3, using same style, huh? Seems reasonable the style would be repeated.

End Mal2 is really the beginning of Mal 3, and the syll count is (drumroll please)... 49! Dates back to Nehemiah 6:15, when the wall was completed. (Again, per the text, don't have to count the syllables, looks like Neh5:14 was written later, parenthetical insertion?)

But wait! There's more!

The distance in Matt1 1st dateline literally counts BACKWARDS to .. 397BC (427-30).
Matt1's SECOND dateline is 476, which counts back to.. Nehemiah's fixing the wall date. Distance? 49! Matthew is emulating Malachi's bracketing style which Malachi used to BRACKET Nehemiah, whose style was TEXTUAL (at least).

I've not seen this style before. Closest was Isaiah 53 splitting Psalm 90:4's 84 into 2 42's. One of which, Matt 1 uses in his last half, to make those 3x14 (14, get it, Mal 1:1)! Luke then takes the 35 from Isaiah 52:15, adds with Matt's 42 to count 77 sons in Luke 3 genealogy!

I should die now.

Last edited by brainout on 01 Oct 2016, 11:32, edited 2 times in total.

Anonynomenon | 01 Oct 2016, 03:16

As if the meter itself isn't proof enough, Matt 1 connecting to Malachi is proof to the Jews that NT should be included with Torah.

brainout | 01 Oct 2016, 03:33

Yeah. 2nd Dateline is Mal3:1, prophecy of John the Baptist, and it appears to be 56 syllables. I can't figure that one out, though. Ideally something happening 7 years prior, or maybe 56 to some other date.. but what? Or 56x7?


Isaiah 53:12 picks up at the ANNUNCIATION, Adar 5 BC. So the first syllable in Isaiah 53:12 is that year, laken a-halleq-LO b'rabbim LOL

Using the first (Mal2:;17) dateline, if you count back 49 you still get the 418BC marker at Zeph1 syll 224 (, verse 7a, which of course balances back to Malachi 1:1 and 2 datelines!

And Zeph 1:7a is about what? SILENCE BEFORE THE LORD, 7 הַ֕ס מִפְּנֵ֖י אֲדֹנָ֣י יְהִו֑ה

Of course with the 56, you realize the immediate impact, which Luke 1 uses as his dateline: JOHN THE BAPTIST would be born within 6 months of it. DUH. Cute. Kill me now, please.

Okay, so what do we have?

Zeph1:7a above, marking (642-224) 418BC, which is the Mal1:1 and 1:2 dateline, which dateline is 14 years after the end of Neh; Malachi 1:2's dateline 35 is prospective. Malachi's ministry runs for the next 35 years (from end Neh). OR, he's dating it prospectively to the end of the historical voting period, which is the same distance (from end Neh).

Neh's textually-stated start/end dates were 20 and 32nd year of Longiamanus, aka 465-20=445 (really 446, diff fiscal) and 465-32=433 (432) BC.

That same 418BC hits smack dab in the middle of Isaiah 53:10's asham (red heifer offering). 21 years later, is the end of the historical voting period ending 397BC. THAT is signified by Isaiah 53:10's end, 'prospers' (yitslah). Yeah, establish the work of our hands, Psalm 90:16-17, so the prediction of Hands is last handed to the hands of Malachi, who finishes his book in 397, end of the historical voting period!

For look: 397BC, is the first dateline of Malachi 2:17, which is 49; which is the Hebrew start of Malachi3. Meaning? 49 years after the start of Nehemiah's book (446BC , Neh 1:1, Chislev 20th year of Longiamanus)! Proof positive that the Daniel 9:26 seven sevens' deadline for completing Canon, is met!

Its second dateline for the same year, is Malachi3:1, which in text forecasts the 'coming' of John the Baptist, with a dateline of 56; so, 56x7=392, the number of years later, John will be born; which year, is the same as the Annunciation, which is 6 months later, Luke 1:26 compared with 36 (in Greek: the pun doesn't work well in English). So Luke datelines his Gospel at 63 years prior to his writing, which is the same Adar 5BC..

Of course the two Matthew 1 datelines of 427 (tagging Malachi 2:17 and 3:1), and 476 (tagging Neh1:1, 5:14) with a 49 in between them (hahahaha), now makes more sense MattMeter2ab.avi.

README! How Matthew's 427 dateline meter not only tells you he writes in 30AD, but reconciles real time back to Abraham; yet also references Psalm 90 and Daniel 9.

He reconciles to Abraham, as follows:

5250 (= end All Time per Psalm 90, Dan 9:24) - 64 (# years Christ dies short of the Mill, which is when Matthew writes) - (427*7=2989) = 2197, the DIFFERENCE BETWEEN

Abraham's birthdate per BIBLE, 1946 years From Adam's Fall to Christ's death, 4136 years From Adam's Fall + the 7 shortfall, because He died early.

Idea is to show Psalm 90:15's equidistance being fulfilled: Christ was allotted 100 years from Birth to 2nd Advent, balancing from Abraham, even as Abraham was age 100 when he hit supermaturity. But David became king 3 years early over Hebron, so the Lord's birthdate had to be moved up 3 years. Because scholars don't know this, we have the 4BC problem. It represents a real shortening of time. Bible accounts on two time tracks, not one, but we treat them as one, so get this 'anomaly'. So Matthew balances to it.

The Mill thus was to begin when Christ was age 97. Yet, is still 'on time' at 4200 (2100 years for the Jews):

2046, Abraham matures, so 53.5 years early. 3096, David king at Hebron, on time from Abraham (1050 deadline), also 3.5 years early, so 57, sum of Jubilee and Passion week (as years) in Mosaic Law.

This is why Temple remains for the 40 years post Christ, and everyone expected its demise in 70 AD when it actually occurred, as Mary shows in her Magnificat meter math. The remaining 14 years were 'used up' to rebuild the Temple, so another 14 years still had to play after Messiah's birth. Included in these are the 3.5 'repayment' on David's Kingship occurring 'early' in order to be on time relative to Abraham. That's why Mary took the timeline to Christ at age 56 (57th year, but 56 is divisible by 7). It was prophetic.

4200 - 57 = 1000th anniversary of David's death, so 4143 from Adam, rather than 4146 from Adam (1050 * 2 from Abraham) . But Christ died 7 years early; hence Matthew, writing that year, debits 64 not 57 to balance.

So the same accounting has a second application, that of VOTING. For it's due to VOTING that the timeline CHANGED. Video goes through the VOTING number play, rather than the above accounting. Israel's sabbatical years were based on this 70 in the 'millennial' accounting since Adam's fall, which is really 1050: 490+70+490. See my How God Orchestrates Time channel to understand that math, How God Orchestrates Time.

Matthew thus employs the same meter dateline convention from Psalm 90 forward:

  1. Create a date formula from the day you're writing BACKWARDS to a Biblically significant date which helps the reader understand the THEME of what you write, and
  2. RELATE that theme to the prophesied Millennium. Usually, this means a count-back from that future endpoint, be it 5250 from Adam when All Time must end, or 4200 when the Mill was supposed to begin.

All the Bible writers follow this system. They usually phrase datelines in dual fashion, and dually: so two datelines, and then you also multiply each of the two datelines by seven. This gives you a fourfold GPS of time and theme for the chapter or book being datelined, as the events are either Biblically significant, even if of secular events, or are events which the Bible records, so you can read about that significance and relate the material to the current chapter or Bible book.

To covert to our BC/AD, use '4103' for Christ's birth, but when counting back to values prior to that date, subtract 4106, not 4103, from the RESULT. Because the timeline shifts at David. So our BC dates pre-David, if not calculated with reference to David, will still tally.

For AD, this often means ADDING three years to whatever the Bible's 'AD' system is used, i.e., Paul says he wrote when Christ was age 56, so you have to add 3 years to it. But that's only needed with reference to any date based on Christ's age. The Roman AUC system is not based on Christ's age, so usually its AD conversions are the same as the Bible's AD dates. I'm still fine-tuning this adjustment. Most of the time it should work for you.

Varro's AUC system is used to get our BC/AD; but his system includes 8 added years, see Since we subtract 3 years but Varro added 8, you get a net 4 years really 7 and 3, respectively, since Christ was born at the END of the year. On our subtraction, see The Easter Computus and the Origins of the Christian Era (page 344)

Related downloads:

Is your head swimming yet? Good.

OH AND THE SUM IS 105 (49+56) 💡😛🙂

Last edited by brainout on 01 Oct 2016, 10:58, edited 1 time in total.

Daniel 9 Meter

brainout | 20 Aug 2015, 01:00

There are as many interpretations of Daniel 9, as there are people. So it's really helpful that his prayer, is metered (click here). The meter is consistent with the style Moses used from Genesis 1 onward, and Daniel 'tags' Moses and Isaiah's meter in a provable manner, so you can tell WHAT DANIEL MEANS. (I really should write a book on this, but maybe God wants someone else to do that, someone society will respect. The data isn't mine, but BIBLE, so anyone can do it. Hence this post.)

Simply put, God granted 2100 years to the goyim then 2100 years to the Jews; during the last 94, Messiah was to be born Year 4106 from Adam's Fall, then pay for sins and die at age 40, which would be 2100 years after Abraham matured; leaving, 53.5 years on the clock to the Promised Psalm 90:4 Millennium, just as Moses tracked since the end of Genesis 1 (in meter). Why? Because Abraham matured 53.5 years prior to the end of the first 2100, so Jewish Time had to begin EARLY. The idea was, the 'Jubilee' (last 50 years) and 'time of Jacob's trouble' (3.5 years) would be in effect, Gentile Time Reimbursed. Ergo, ever since Moses wrote Genesis, there was a SET TIME (l'moed, in Hebrew) for everything, and especially for Messiah.

Problem was, a) would God be faithful to keep that TIME promise? Then b) would Israel be faithful to accept Messiah when He came? Answers: a) yes, b) no. But that outcome wasn't known, until He came.

Meanwhile, the Schedule could be thwarted or delayed. So Daniel's prayer, is actually an accounting recap of the time spent to show that the Temple went down per God's ruling in Jeremiah 25:11ff and 29:10, which Daniel was reading at the time, per Daniel 9:2. So when the 70 years had nearly elapsed for Daniel's own captivity in the first wave of deportees with Nebuchadnezzar -- he invokes that SCHEDULE as the juridical basis for rebuilding the Temple. So his prayer is metered as an accounting balance sheet, and God too replies in meter showing those accounting values.. but for us reading in translation, we only see the numbers in God's reply and don't know why those numbers are there.

The debates have thus been endless.

For Daniel, this was basic calendar math: as his meter shows, ticking off time per kingship year, starting with David at Hebron: David had to be crowned no later than the 1050st year after Abraham matured.. and he was, which Daniel meters in Daniel 9:6.. but then David died late at age 77 (a blistering point made in the accounting from 1Kings 1:1-6:1, which Daniel is recounting in his prayer), so that set the clock back for Last David aka Christ's Birth, to be no later than the 97th year prior to the elapse of, the 4200nd year after Adam's FALL, so to die no later than the 1000th anniversary of David's own death in 963 BC. (The 2100+2100 is measured starting with Adam's Fall, Genesis 3:15-22.)

So the '62nd week' of Daniel, ended at 37 AD, 586 (BC) +70+70+49+434, when He was scheduled to Die. Then another now 57 years was to elapse (adjusting for Solomon's lateness in 1Kings 6:1, 3.5 years after David died). So the Mill should have started in 94 AD. It didn't. The Trib should have started 7 years prior, in 87AD. It didn't. Because, Christ died 7 years EARLIER THAN SCHEDULED, a fact which goes missed by 'scholars' who insist on using lunar years, though the Bible only uses solar (483 lunar years equals 476 solar, so they miss the extra seven in their calculations). So He dies at the end of the 61st week, not 62nd.

So pre-Trib rapture remains due to Israel's being owed an added seven years that were supposed to be spent taking down the Temple. So those seven years still play, and against the Temple as everyone expected.. but the Tribulation seven, remains.

So John writes Revelation in 88 AD, a year after the Trib was supposed to start, to explain why Trib didn't begin on the old schedule. In 88AD, Domitian wanted everyone and his brother jailed for conspiracy; so maybe someone in the provinces who wanted to curry favor with Domitian, went on a Christian/Jewish witch-hunt, and jailed John for that reason. (For there's no proof Domitian ordered John jailed. The so-called 'church fathers' lie about everything, couldn't get a Bible doctrine right if their lives depended on it.. and just blamed Domitian. You know, name-dropping. We shouldn't just swallow, what they write!) Rev is an update on, Daniel 9.

So as you can imagine, this Daniel 9 meter is a political powder keg. People have been killing each other for centuries, over Bible interpretation. Every denomination will have a vested interest in the meter, pro or con. That makes it difficult to evaluate, objectively. So the best approach, is to examine Daniel 9's meter, forensically. Draw conclusions from SOURCE, not opinion.

Ergo, my many videos. For Daniel, the videos are few, because the pdf is really better, click here. Video channel is here, very unfinished. Notice I don't cover variants, because (as is usual) in the BHS text, I didn't find any. Doesn't mean there aren't any, but as you know the Hebrew texts have been simplified much over the years, and the variants eliminated. So you're kinda limited to qere versus kethib readings. By contrast, LXX varies a lot, and I didn't use it, since it's not metered, and not original.

One thing for sure: those who claim a late date for Daniel, don't know how to read the Hebrew. Yes, it's Hebrew in Chapter 9. I don't cover that and a lot of the debate, in videos or the pdf. 😛 There is a limited intro to Daniel in the Youtube videos, starting here. That link's video description has a lot of audio outlining the whole book, using the NIV to make it easier to follow. Orientation to the whole book matters, to get the context of Daniel 9 properly seated. It's positively embarrassing how badly Chapter 9 has been misread over the centuries. Calvies and Catholics are especially bad at it, but the Dispies aren't all that great, either. So of course the debate continues, if everyone's inept!

So where to start to get what DANIEL meant? Well, the pdf is good for its meter chart and 'Footnote E', which tracks the specific verses Daniel references as he talks; his satire is biting, so that makes it easier to know what verses he has in mind. So the meter, combined with the clever matching of words to verses mostly in Kings and Chronicles (which Daniel was reading at the time Chapter 9 begins, see Dan 9:2) -- that altogether, makes for an extremely sophisticated study I don't quite know how to cover, in videos.

Mary knows what Daniel means,

Again, the 56 -- which equals the number of days from Passover to Pentecost, and again from Pentecost to 9th Av, the same as will be the takedown time of the 2nd Temple too -- that 56, is employed by all these writers.

Yeah, except.. although discernible and documented in the videos, this stuff is UNKNOWN in university and other sources of theological erudition. It's unknown, because the math errors over the centuries, never get corrected, so they all mask the accounting:

Actually, it was due to Eusebius' perennial incompetence and lying in nearly everything he wrote, which resulted in my learning Daniel's meter. That dingdong just flat added 490 years to come up with the totally-anti-Biblical idea that David ruled in 1076 BC (Egyptian Chronicles: With a Harmony of Sacred and Egyptian Chronology, and an Appendix on Babylonian and Assyrian Antiquities Vol. 2, page 801) (586+490)! But, Eusebius is dead now, and knows better. Pity no one respects him enough to fix his math, so he doesn't have to keep reliving his mistakes... Pity more, that some OLD human's writing, matters more than Scripture!

Drives me nuts. Dispies and non-dispies alike will be shocked to see their bad scholarship, so easily undone. Catholics and Calvinists and all preterists are shown slipshod, but the pre-Tribbers (and I'm among them) aren't shown up to be right, either. For Bible's accounting basis differs from ALL of them. Yeah, Rapture is Pre-Trib, but pre-Tribbers get the reason and timing wrong.

So if these many hoary heads missed this accounting for centuries, how can a 'brainout' get it? Well, the answer is that anyone who asks God, gets answers. I asked God, when confronted with the 1076 'discrepancy', which also contradicts all 19th century et seq. scholarhip -- because all the extant answers on both sides of the debate, don't balance. Now, it's not possible that all of the numbers I show are right, either; but the total from Adam through Christ, balances to Bible and accepted history; AND, the underlying meter and Time rules are consistently tracked pan-Bible to match, as shown in the How God Orchestrates Time channel. Start there with the math. If you see any mistakes, post here or start a new thread or post in the Eschatology forum, whatever you prefer. For the math is the math. 1+1=2 doesn't require initials after your name, to justify accuracy.

So BE SKEPTICAL. All I can do is disclose, here's what I found and what it seems to mean. Consistently, from Gen to Rev. Getting the meaning out of Daniel will elucidate Rev, especially since John keeps talking back to Daniel 7-12. So center the examination on Daniel, and then see where that takes you.

Anonynomenon | 12 Sep 2015, 08:12

Do you think that maybe the Church was never destined to know this information as common knowledge? Not because God is hiding it, but because we choose not to see. I mean, why isn't there any documentation reflecting any of this from the early Christians? God preserved the Old Testament via the Jews for us today, what if this 'meter' is being rediscovered for the Jews at a future time?

Sorry, but I just don't see your everyday church goer deviating from their hand-shaking-ministries and potlucks long enough to absorb any of this. If its not Jonathan Khan, they don't read it. It's a darn miracle that I happened to click on one of your videos out of the chaos of youtube.

Did Daniel even know that he was metering his prayer?

brainout | 13 Sep 2015, 02:14

Yeah, Daniel knew he was metering the prayer -- out loud as he talked! -- and he expected others reading what he wrote to know. The meter system goes back to Moses ever since Genesis 1, written the year before Moses died.

Obviously the Jews forgot how it worked, but since the meter style is in every book and maybe every chapter of the Bible, we can see how it works. Whether MY conclusions about it are right, one can rightly dispute. But its existence as a meter style, should be indisputable by now. If even this brainout can see it, then surely the hoary heads should be able to. All you have to do, is count syllables. I did a writeup on how anyone can diagnose meter, click here. (You can also get the pdf or doc).

I've been looking for evidence that anyone in Christendom or Judaism (outside of obviously the Bible writers and readers), knew of the meter. So far I'm not finding anything. I kinda don't expect the Church Fathers to know, because their ability to understand Scripture is provably zero. Church Hall of Shame video series isn't complete, but it shows live from their own words which you can read yourself via links in the video descriptions, that they couldn't get Bible right if their lives depended on it.

That others don't see it, I cannot explain. Yet once you see it, you'll know.

Ironic, that you should post now. I just finished making more videos on 'Daniel Revisited' which I'll post to vimeo in a couple of hours.

The most important thing about Daniel's style to note, is that

How many millions of dollars and man hours over the centuries have been lost because we listened to dippy Eusebius instead of BIBLE....

EDIT: vid here, the next one will be d6, followed by d7, 8, 9.. so just change that last digit. The collections are primarily two showing these videos in order, so you can click on the 'couch' and (God help you) watch them play sequentially:

Anonynomenon | 13 Sep 2015, 19:24

I just find it strange. Is there anything talking about the meter's existence in the Talmud or other traditional commentaries? If this was once common knowledge, even if only in academic circles, I would expect someone to have written something about it. The Church fathers may have been idiots but you would think they would've at least have parroted somthing about it.

Speaking in rhythm and rhymes takes practice, but it becomes easy. In high school I used to freestyle rapp and I can compose music, so I know that meterings isn't rare; however, its one thing to speak casually in meter, but to map out a historic/prophetic timeline requires pen, paper, and time (in my opinion). How can it be proven that Daniel even knew he was speaking or writing in such an organized meter? This seems more like an illustration of divinely inspired authorship. Look at Balaam. He meant to curse Israel, but the Holy Spirit blessed them instead.

I know that my questions may appear mundane compared to the overall subject matter, but what if the knowledge of the meter is only reserved for a small group of believers rather than the general public?

If it was meant to be public knowledge, then Christians have really dropped the ball.

If its only meant for certain people, then why now?

brainout | 13 Sep 2015, 20:26

Your questions are not mundane. They are important questions, and I have them also. I find it really hard to believe that the very obvious meter patterns shown, aren't reflected elsewhere in extra-Biblical writings. We know for sure that metered writing was used outside of the Bible, it's a very common feature in Greek. But the style is not the same. We also know that it was at least sometimes a style to write meter with a specific number of syllables as a timeline. But again, this style is not the same.

This is not rhyming. It's an accounting meter. Scholars keep missing it because they are expecting other types of styles they know, instead of looking at the Bible text and seeing what style is native to that text. But if you look at it yourself, the patterns are obvious. I did the videos for that reason, so that anyone can look straight at the Bible text and see the style.

So why can't we find added 'witnesses' to that style in the past? Well, maybe they exist but the manuscripts are unknown -- once upon a time, many of the Bible mss weren't found, either -- or, maybe someone isn't disclosing the material, or.. I don't know. All I know is what I show and the patterns are really bald. Nothing secretive about them.

But this is SOURCE TEXT, so technically it shouldn't matter whether we find anything by anyone else 'recognizing' it. I don't need the sanction of an 'expert' to look up in the sky, see the Sun itself, and KNOW it's there.

The source text is pretty bald about what the numbers in Daniel 9:24-27 in God's reply, signify. Or at least, you have almost no doubt that God's Reply is to Daniel's METER, for look at the video again: the 49, 69, 434 are all bald. So is 476 which is 14 shy of 490.

Video link, this time the Youtube copy, just stop the video at four seconds, and look at the screen:

It conforms to the 490s in the begat differentials and in text like Genesis 4 and when the Lord says seventy times seven, the fact that Noah and Abraham keep on being 490 years apart (their sons, their maturation dates), how David's crowned 1050 years after Abraham matured, the Temple is dedicated 490 years after the Exodus, Christ is born 1000 years after David's crowned King over all Israel, many many obvious set dates like that in the Bible itself.

Sanhedrin 98 of the Talmud already knows the 40 year allotment for Messiah's lifetime, which is relevant because then He would be scheduled to DIE 2100 years after Abraham's maturation.

So the point is, the meter is in many ways just added confirmation. We're not looking at the explicit text Bible provides and adding it up right. So if we ignore the source text, then the fact that no one's noticing the meter either, isn't really much of a surprise. And in all events, the AUTHORITY is the source text, not negligent Dear Dr So and So who leads you in rah rah Jesus songs.

brainout | 15 Sep 2015, 02:47

Video Summary of the Daniel 9 Meter Import, baldly showing how to read Daniel 9:24-27, since GOD USES DANIEL'S METER NUMBERS in His Textual reply.

The video's description has links to the relevant docs/pdfs/backup videos to demonstrate that proof. The video itself, merely summarizes it with obvious meter showing the same numbers as we see in the 'later' text of Daniel 9:24-27. Since you can count the syllables yourself, the evidence is objectively verifiable.

Anonynomenon | 16 Sep 2015, 05:36

Ok. I spent some time watching your new videos. All I can comment on is whether or not Daniel actually spoke in meter as he prayed. I doubt he did. Here is why, you say Daniel 9:4-13 is 434 syllables long. According to one of your documents (which I double checked with Biblehub's transliteration), verse 4 begins with a 3rd person intro to the prayer. So out of the total 434 syllables, only 419 are Daniel's prayer in 1st person. That is not divisible by 7.

Did Daniel know to start off 15 syllables short of 49 to include a later introduction? It's possible, but don't think so.

I think the account happened and when Daniel wrote it down, the Holy Spirit metered it for him.

How would you explain the inclusion of the 3rd person statements (especially the one introducing God's reply in verse 20)? That would imply foreknowledge.

I do believe the metering is there. You have convinced me of that.

brainout | 16 Sep 2015, 18:41

Yes, perhaps he wrote it later, or maybe even wrote it first and then read it aloud as his prayer; though it's more likely written later, since at the time of praying he couldn't know what the answer would be, exactly. Gabriel had to tell him. Plus, he couldn't KNOW it was to become Canon, could he -- until after God answered? I'm guessing. Cuz to write it out for others means God must have commanded it. So the written account is what we get.

But since he's quoting himself, we know his actual prayer was metered. I mean, to add 49 syllables in verse 4, makes that whole style work. So he was doing it, on purpose, titling his own prayer. Unless you can come up with a better answer. For the meter is a cumulative count, therefore the 49 syllables at the beginning, make for the entire pattern. Luke does the same thing to the Magnificat, and hers is metered WITHOUT Luke's addition. So she's titling her own prayer herself. Luke added 'kai eipen Miryam' to align their own Anno Domini (in the meter), to Varro (which became law when Luke wrote, was not yet law when Mary spoke).

No, the meter style is to include the writer's name from the getgo. Moses started the style in Genesis 1, and counts his own 'Prayer of Moses' text as part of the meter in Psalm 90. Remember, the purpose of meter is to COUNT SYLLABLES for accurate copying and repeating, so EVERY WORD gets counted. It's not like our modern metering style.

There are 30 rules for the meter I've found so far, defined per the actual Bible usage. You might find others. The 30 I've found so far, are listed here: BibleHebMeterCharacs.htm / BibleHebMeterCharacs.pdf / BibleHebMeterCharacs.doc.

It's a habit of Bible Hebrew to state the TITLE as part of the book, starts in Genesis 1, whose title is IN THE BEGINNING...

So that's where you start Daniel's meter. With the new editor I think I can show the embed (play button, in the Editor) for easier reference, here. It's fuzzy within the embed, but just after you start to play, click on the Settings at right and select 1080p HD. That should sharpen it. Notice how 9:4 is the verse where Daniel starts the meter, a) because it is BRACKETED by another 49, and b) because it TIES BACK IN TIME to the Temple's downfall. So those are other checks you do to determine WHEN the metering begins. Ask God for verification, don't trust what I say. The truth should be objectively verifiable, as just stated, but God might offer more info than I know to say.

Master list of all the meters I've found in Gen through Rev so far, is in the first two pages here, LukeDatelineMeters.pdf. That listing also has a master list of the videos in the same first pages. Other docs have listings, but that's the latest one (sorry, I don't have time to update everything at once).

Last edited by brainout on 16 Sep 2015, 21:16, edited 2 times in total. clarification, grammar, fix typos

Zephaniah Meter: Samex 1-3

Anonynomenon | 12 Sep 2016, 04:39

It turns out that my Zephaniah meter had some invalid elisions, so I started from scratch. This time, I did what I should have done in the first place. I did a total syllable count (counting all potential shewa syllables), and started eliding as I read the text. This is just Samex 1, but it is in a word doc format, so you can test alternate elisions yourself if you like. Hopefully I will be following up with Samex 2&3 soon. Let me know if you need a PDF copy.

I'm attaching an alternate version (PDF format to avoid problems), with different elisions. [updated 4/15/2017]

brainout | 12 Sep 2016, 22:31

Okay, figured out the dates:

I didn't know Manasseh age at death when writing up the Daniel piece. Someday will have to edit it. 2Kings/Chron text says he was 12 when Hez died, ruled 55 years but that includes the 12, for Hez made Manesseh co-ruler at the latter's birth. Not sure where I can prove that in Bible via text, but the MATH works that way.

brainout | 17 Sep 2016, 03:27

Jer of Jeremiah is concatenation of yarum (exalted) and Yah so I'd translated that God is Exalted (see Isaiah 52:13).

Zeph of Zephaniah is tsafon meaning to hide a treasure, so God is Hidden Treasure.

Jos of Josiah is supposed to be help/support, but I don't know what root. Seems to me it should really be shua of yasha, but I can't prove that. The lexicons are HORRIBLE at not parsing names.

Josiah was predicted to Jeroboam in 1Kings13:2. So there is probably a timing meter connected somewhere. 1Kings 12:12 records the Jeroboam rebellion, which had to be in 930BC when Rehoboam first took over. So maybe there is a dateline in 1Kings 13 to tell you when that prediction was made (or wherever 1Kings 13 really starts, going by the samex or feh markers). Just going by the text, it looks like Chapter 12 continues in 13, no break, and the year of the prophecy is still 930BC or so.

Josiah prophecy is fulfilled in 2Kings 23:15ff. Looks like still in his 18th year so about age 26-27 (counting from age 8 when Amon/Manasseh die). So that year would be 640-18, 622. Jeremiah was then ministering to him for five years, and in the same year LOL Jer FOUND BIBLE which no one knew of (you know, the 'book' even Jer's dad, HiIGH PRIEST Hilkiah didn't know what it was, so he had to ask cleaning-lady Huldah, 2Kings 22).

So 930-622, is 308. Kinda meaningful, in your Zeph meter!

Passages on Manasseh et al. are 2Kings21ff and 2Chron33ff.

So God-Hidden-Treasure ministers to God-My-Help and is later helped (pun intended) by God-Is-Exalted.

The chrono is tricky. Manasseh born 698BC, crowned at birth by Hez. That date is 3 years after Hez prayer to be healed (he was childless at the time). Hez dies 686 BC, 12 years later; Manasseh thus has 55 total years -12, so 33 to go. But when Hez dies, Manasseh is almost 13, cuz when 56 in the timeline, Amon takes over; so Manasseh is STILL ALIVE, at age 56.

So Amon kept alive only while Manasseh is; when the latter dies, Amon is assassinated, then the people repent, kill assassins and put Josiah in place; who by then is 8 years old, so is 6 or maybe 5 years old when Amon crowned.

Jeremiah comes in 13th year when Josiah is newly age of accountability, age 20 or 21. The prior year, of his own accord he started cleaning out the Temple, which implies he was 21 when Jer came to him.

Zeph comes in Josiah's FIRST year, when he was only 5/6; the REGENT was impacted by Zeph ministry, with child king Josiah, listening. Amon didn't like it, undoing what his dad Manasseh did. Note this means Amon sired Josiah when Amon only age 15/16, so we have a Nero (teenager) problem.

When did Manasseh get captured by the Assyrians? I thought age 49, but now not sure. Maybe your Zeph 35 also refers that capture year, with the 21 dateline. Seriously need to parse Kings and Chronicles cuz they HAVE to be metered. Kill me now.

Text says Josiah ruled 31 years net of Amon, so Josiah must have been crowned when Amon was. So 642BC is Amon w Josiah co-ruling.

Then all the datelines fit, including the weird stress in Daniel 9:11-12 on the paired 58 meters (i.e., snub that too late for Passover or Pentecost), which must reference Manasseh at death.

But now hear this! The 35 and 21 Zeph1 datelines are.. PALINDROMES!!!
'How?' you ask.

But that's not all (now I sound like a Ginzu knives infomercial)...

Whew. I've been agonizing over those paired 58's for YEARS. (Sneaky palindrome Daniel inserted, so clearly DANIEL is looking at Zeph AND Isaiah 53 AND Kings AND Chronicles AND Jeremiah all at the same time!)

35 years later (after 642), is.. 607, the FIRST DEPORTATION, the one DANIEL will be in!

Someone please kill me. I shouldn't get to see this and live.

Okay, so matching up to Isaiah 53, which Zeph1 TRACKS:

Please someone kill me. The precision. The pain and yet grace (good ending report card on Manasseh who did go faithful in the end). Reminds one of Revelation 3.

Finally, when calculating one keeps on having to round up or down 1. Mid-year stuff. Or flipping fiscals. I can't tell for sure which fiscal year Isaiah is using, and whether he keeps using the same one. The regnal year is based on vernal equinox, but the civil year on the autumnal. (Same problem when dating Roman Emperors or rulers.)

brainout | 22 Sep 2016, 10:53

Okay, I see why you're thinking ne'um YHWH is anaphora. Maybe it is. Amen legw humin certainly is an equivalent, and we know THAT is anaphora.

Anonynomenon | 22 Sep 2016, 20:43

I was thinking the same thing, that amein lego humin was a shift from 3rd person to 1st person, from the original n'um Yehwah. However, it doesn't run through the entire Zeph meter like it did in Matt 24-25. So if it is anaphora, then why does it end in Samex 2?

brainout | 22 Sep 2016, 21:24

Good question. Seems like a timeline to me. Surely is one, tracking Isaiah, but why does it stop then at 12BC? Is there a 7 ellipsis? Why doesn't it stop at 33 BC like Isaiah does, WITH his ellipsis?

Enquiring minds, want to know. 😛

See, here's the weird thing: if I insert the 364 ellipsis just after Isa53 verse 10 -- which ends at the end of the historical voting period Daniel keeps tracking to, 397BC when Malachi completed -- it works fine.

But it also works fine, if I insert the 364 at the end of verse 11. The hiatus in THAT case, takes me from 397-28-364, to 5 BC, the Annunciation.

I'm thinking the intertestamental years are highlighted, so peg the 364 after verse 10. Cuz I can't see why 367 would instead be stressed. Also, the syntactical break between v.10's DECREE and v.11's Him actually paying in TIME, seems more aptly suited to a 'year' in between, as a way of saying 'history' versus eternity past (v10).

Anonynomenon | 23 Sep 2016, 01:19

I doubt the timeline stops at 12 BC. Samex 3 needs to be counted, and I bet it will take us to 4200 give or take 14 years. I metered it a few years ago and got 119, but I want to try it again.

brainout | 23 Sep 2016, 01:22

Okay, but there are a total of six samez's, last one lacks the letter, since ends the book. I'm trying to figure out why.

Seems to me that if what you say about samex 3 is true, the total should be 736 or 742. Daniel 9's total, is 742. Leaves out 56 from 5250 (in short, he sevens the count).

BTW, looks like Zeph1:4a is mistranslated. Hebrew says God will stretch His Hand OVER Judah and Jerusalem, and in the meter that year (at end of clause), is 516AD when the 2nd Temple completes. So read as PROTECTION, then the following clause about removing the Ba'als, makes more sense.

Back at the end of Zeph 1:3, the end of verse 3, 49 submeter, is when Daniel 9 datelines first, so Daniel is probably looking at Zeph 1:3, as well. At the point he prays, 538BC, indeed the Land was desolate.

Problem is, the Hebrew is adamah, not ha eretz. Why? I don't know.

Do you have the Thieme tapes on Zephaniah? I think I have reels, will have to go look. I've not studied that book.

Anonynomenon | 23 Sep 2016, 04:03

I don't have Thieme's Zeph lessons. I'm still in Rev. Once I get past the 6th Seal, I want to start alternating with Jeshurun lessons.

What year did Thieme do Zeph?

Maybe HaAdamah is being used to mean the world, where HaEretz is used for the promised land???

brainout | 23 Sep 2016, 08:05

Well, I'll have to look up when Thieme did Zeph. It's in his pdf files, I'll have to find where I put them. Found the pdf, it's here: viewtopic.php?f=16&t=379&p=3009#p3009 BUT I CANNOT FIND ZEPHANIAH in it. I could swear I have reels. Will have to go look. I wonder where I put them (I have like 15,000 reels).

Okay, I found my checklist of the tapes I have. No Zeph taught, not even in the early catalogue. Malachi was 1968. Since Zeph preceded Jer, maybe the Zeph stuff is somehow taught alongside Jer. That series is VERY long, I have multiple reels of it. Not sure when I can get to it pre-surgery, tho.

As for ha Adamah vs Ha Eretz, that's a conundrum. Perhaps a parallel to Deut 32:8, idea that all history hangs on Israel, and that the prophecy of Temple Down means Earth Down if not healed, but that verse 4 in HEBREW (not English) seems to be a reassurance that God stretches His Hand OVER Israel to protect her, so that staves off the end of ha Adamah. There is no 'against' in the Hebrew I can see, but rather AL (over). Then the text promises to remove the Ba'als, etc which fits the protection idea.

The 418 BC is bald enough (syll 224 in Zeph1), prophecy of OT completion, ergo 'silence' (cuz listening, I'd bet). It equals Malachi 1:1 dateline 14, walks back to Nehemiah at END, and then Malachi 1:2 dateline 35, walks back to START Nehemiah, 12th year of Artaxerxes Longiamanus (465-425).

But 42 years later, is 376, and I'm not sure I get what's pegged. Malachi might have the answer in some prophetic passage, likely in Malachi 3, which is the last chapter. So I'm stuck again.

Closest thing I found re 376 was this. Seems to say the turning point in Persian suzerainty was that battle, which was crippled in part due to politicking among the Royal Family back home in Susa. But I don't think Zeph is stressing Persia. Has to be something re Israel's involvement that year, since the Zeph 1:8 TEXT is about punishing Israel's PRINCES. It's got to be very important, to be likened to the very DAY of the Lord.

I need historical corroboration. Or, something prophetic and timed in Malachi? Maybe it's in the Maccabees; though not scripture, often historically accurate. But 1 Macc opens up after Alex dies.

Okay, this might be important. Ha Adamah is only used in Zeph 1:2 and 1:3. Beg in Zeph2, it's ha eretz. Text SEEMS to indicate that Zeph1 is the decree, and Zeph2 and 3 are what to do to avoid it being carried out, idea that if Israel (re)turns and becomes faithful, Zech1 won't happen or won't happen against her.

Also, note:
-5250=1786 years left on the clock (pre-Church) to end Mill.
-630 total in the first two samexes
1156 is remainder in the final four?

Maybe there are ellipsis insertions. Given how Zeph ends, I expect some, maybe?

Next, Jeremiah would elab on Zeph, as would Ezekiel, and for sure Ezekiel covers the Mill, so we might not know what Zeph covers, but at least it can be preliminarily mapped.

brainout | 24 Sep 2016, 08:59

PS I'm having trouble reconciling the TEXT with the meter. Years still fine, but between 418BC and 299BC, text seems to be pointing at events within Israel, not Persia or Greece per se. I suspect other Bible books will elaborate on Zeph prophecy data, so we know what it means. But vetting it historically might be a pistol, as it's the intertestamentary period. Maccabees doesn't pick up until the Diadochi wars. Daniel 11 covers the interim in a sweeping marital way, and Mary tags it, but that's from 305BC onward.

brainout | 01 Oct 2016, 13:09

Okay, I think much of the 418BC onward meter is resolved as to WHAT it references. But I'll start with the end, verse 18:

I think it needs to be broken into two clauses at the end, not the 17 shown. The revision would be 10 and 7,

As 10: כִּֽי־כָלָ֤ה־נִבְהָלָה֙ יַֽעֲ שֶׂ֔ה

As 7: אֵ֥ת כָּל־יֹשְׁבֵ֖י הָאָֽרֶץ׃

That last 7, lines up with Isaiah 53:11's penultimate clause for the same 18-12BC period, tsadiq avdi l'rabbim. Each are 7 syllables, from start of 18BC to end of 12BC. Makes sense that Zeph would tag Isaiah.

What makes this so cool, is that once the Temple is up, it is REPRESENTING the Isaiah text and the 'kaleh' in Zeph 1:18, esp. since 'end' signifies completion. Herod apparently finished Temple PRECINCT completion in (642-630) 12BC, which would enable mass visitors and storage, shops, etc.

Also means that Isa53's 364 ellipsis is between its verses 10-11, not 11 and 12, else this tag wouldn't work.

Earlier, Zeph notably benchmarks at syll 602, 40 BC which Mary used as her 35 dateline to also benchmark when Herod finished subduing Israel (and I suspect, her own birth year, but can't yet prove). So that's before Isaiah 53:11 picks up, 7 years prior. But it's evocative of Isaiah 53:12 cuz that verse is 42 syllables, haha. Which, Mary also uses. Can't be coincidence.

Anonynomenon | 29 Oct 2016, 22:40

I updated the original post with the new Zeph Meter which includes Samex 3.

Something remarkable that I noticed is the last line of Zamex 3.


וְעֶקְרֹ֖ון תֵּעָקֵֽר׃

It reads "Ekron/Eqeron will be uprooted" (We'Eqeron te'aqer), but the name Ekron/Eqron comes from the word eqer which means transplanted. So it looks like Zephaniah counted the shewa in We'eqron to achieve We'eqeron. Without this, the meter would be short by one syllable. Very clever.

brainout | 30 Oct 2016, 05:55

OMG 756 total? 14 more than Daniel 9? Kill me now. Got to study it more. Of particular interest is Zeph2:1, where you broke it as 4 and 8. Zeph 1 ends at 12 BC. So 2:1 ends at 0BC. Not sure what to make of that. I wonder if the timeline starts over. Given that period covers Christ and the pivot growing out from Him, I'd expect to see it seven sooner?

LOL go look up the LXX for Zeph2:4, they use the same wordplay you do. Apparently Ekron was already a Greek word? See how the LXX covers it:

ISBE and the other dictionaries/lexicons treat the wordplay as follows:

Ekron means FIRMLY ROOTED. See here (tho what I say below comes from Bibleworks' copy of ISBE

So God is saying the FIRMLY ROOTED shall be UPROOTED, not merely transplanted, tho that idea is in there too. That's the history of the place. The ARK was uprooted and sent to Firmly Rooted, who voted to uproot the Ark and send it back to Israel, and then uprooted against Sargon II, then in 701 uprooted Sennacherib's pawn Padi, sending him to Hezekiah. Senny baby then uprooted FIRMLY ROOTED by invading it, and set siege to Jerusalem to get Padi back, Hezekiah relenting. But that means Senny came back a SECOND TIME, laid siege to Jeru again (2Kings 18ff; this is my smoking gun for Isaiah 53's timing, I've been looking for it since 2008). Hez prayed and God killed 185K of Senny's troops there (Isaiah 37, 1Kings19). Senny then goes home in shame and his own kids kill him in his own act of worship (ibid and proof extra-Biblically, too). By then, Hez had been dead about five years (compare 2Kings 19-21, Isa38).

Read this, on Ekron and Senny:

Ekron is central to Isaiah 53.

Timeline, from 2Kings 18ff:

EQUIDISTANCE: Hez is in his 14th year from 715, when Ahaz died.
Hez WAS in his 14th year also, in 712BC, counting from the time he was crowned while Ahaz still lived.
Not counting the year this happens, Hez will have 14 more years afterwards (Isa38).
He was childless at this midpoint, and Manasseh is born 3 years later, counting the year.

Ergo, 70 years prior to Zeph 1's dateline of 642BC, Samex 1 =712BC when Isa 53:1 begins, tying to Sargon II. So maybe Zeph LAYERS Samex 3 on Samex 1 (just as Luke 21 and Eph1:3-14 did upon Matt24 meter)! Notice, for example, how Samex3 is also 126 to perhaps overlay Samex1 exactly?

So meter's saying, '70 years before I write, Ekron revolted against Sargon (712, per Assyrian records), which caused Senny to try to invade Jerusalem in Hez' 14th year'(701, per Assyrian records). Dual entendre here, as the 14th year would be 'Arm' in Isaiah 53:2, EQUIDISTANCE. See 2Kings 18-19, Isa36-38.

Then: '56 years after I write, Temple goes down just as Isaiah metered it, and Ekron will be uprooted too.' For 56 years after 642 BC, is 586BC, which is last clause in Isaiah 53:4. Isa53:1, started on the cause de jure of Senny attacking Jeru over Ekron.

Okay, God better give me billions of dollars, cuz I need to spend them on you and yours. I've been trying since 2008 to figure out WHY Isa53:1 began at 711-712 BC and NEVER would have thought of Ekron!

What's most shocking is it agrees with Matt24-25 meter, in the sense of 1050+7 as a synonymal metaphor. 750 sevens in a 1050. The Matt meter is meant to be a RECONCILING 3150+7 (Christ dies 63 years before the current 1050 he's in, ends, so adds 63 to 'fit' the pre-Church accounting for 1050s.)

Anonynomenon | 26 Feb 2017, 01:58

I went through Zephaniah and traded out some elisions that I didn't really feel comfortable with. The syllable count didn't change, but there is a spot or two with extra seveing.

Neum is now two syllables, and these are the changes that I made. Let me know what you think of them.

(הָ אֲ דָ מָ ֖ה) Zeph 1:2&3
(מֵ הַ גְּ בָעֹֽ ות) Zeph 1:10
(כַּ גְּ לָלִֽ ים) Zeph 1:17
(יֹ שְׁ בֵ֖י) Zeph 1:18

brainout | 26 Feb 2017, 02:36

Okay, see how you got those counts. I'm astonished at the total. Not sure what to make of it. But then, there's more to go. Looks like you'll go well beyond 1050.

Anonynomenon | 26 Feb 2017, 02:41

Yeah, I need to finish. There are 5 total Samex's, and 5 total occurences of "neum Yehwah", so if it is some kind of anaphora, I'll need to meter the entire book to find out.

brainout | 26 Feb 2017, 21:37

Sounds like he's plotting Time from 642 BC to the end of the scheduled Millennium, so 642+40 for Christ's lifetime, plus 57 to get to Mill, then 1050, sum 1789. So if it's not a 642 start date, you'll know. Also, he might omit 7 years for the Trib, since the 50-year gap for the evangelization of the Gentiles (pre-Church schedule) might be inserted. I don't see it counted as Jewish time, which it would not be, so might omit 57 from the 1789 (or so) total.

Anonynomenon | 12 Apr 2017, 05:54

I edited my OP, so I'm just bumping the thread.

brainout | 12 Apr 2017, 07:22

What do the x's mean? I'm stumped on 42 and 28 as datelines.

Anonynomenon | 12 Apr 2017, 09:43

Sorry, the x's don't mean anything. They were just place holders and are supposed to be in the 'paragraph' column. For some reason, my PC screwed up the document when I saved it. I'll try to fix it in the morning.

brainout | 12 Apr 2017, 18:39

Oh, you don't have to fix it. Editing a Word doc in Hebrew is too much of a pistol. You move cursor left to go right, and right to go left, crazy.

Anonynomenon | 13 Apr 2017, 05:12

Looking at the meter, I think Zeph was written in the last year of Josiah's reign (which would be 609 BC). I have not reconciled the formal datelines yet, but I'm thinking that the 34th syllable is a reference to the fact that Josiah became king 34 years after Manasseh.

Also, if you look at syllable 55, that clause talks about God taking everything from the land. Manasseh reigned for a total of 55 years, and the judgment on Judah was a result of the idolatry initiated by Manasseh. Compare the following verses.

Zeph 1:2“I will completely remove all things from the face of the earth...
2Kings 21:13 ...and I will wipe Jerusalem as one wipes a dish, wiping it and turning it upside down.

Then, if we treat the 13 syllables of Zeph 1:2a (quoted above) as an informal dateline (John's style), that takes us to 596 BC, which is round the time Nebuchadnezzar started the first deportation of the Jews.

It seems that the 'neum Yehwah' of verse 2b really belongs with verse 3. I didn't expect that, but check this out.

Zeph 1:3



4 syllables


אָסֵ֨ף אָדָ֜ם וּבְהֵמָ֗ה

8 syllables


אָסֵ֤ף עֹוף־הַשָּׁמַ֙יִם֙ וּדְגֵ֣י הַיָּ֔ם

12 syllables

So 24 years post 609 BC is second siege on Jerusalem around 585 BC, resulting in the destruction of the Temple.

or, if we look at it a different way by adding the next clause in vs 3...


וְהַמַּכְשֵׁלֹ֖ות אֶת־הָרְשָׁעִ֑ים וְהִכְרַתִּ֣י אֶת־הָאָדָ֗ם מֵעַ֛ל פְּנֵ֥י הָאֲדָמָ֖ה

26 syllables

4+8+12+26=50 Stumbling block removed.

Fifty years from the 585 BC diaspora is 535 BC. By then, the sentence for the 49 missed Sabbatical years would have been served, and the Jews would once again be allowed to enter the Land. I'm really not to sure if that's how I should be reading this, since its really not functioning as a typical informal dateline. Is it some kind of pun???

I still need to keep testing the formal datelines, but I wanted to type this up before I forgot it.

brainout | 13 Apr 2017, 09:43

Syntax of verses 2 and 3 both begin with asaph. So how can neum yehwah begin verse 3?

I don't see anything wrong with the datelines you have of 28 and 42, but I can't tie them now. Would be 644 BC, so 42 after Hezikiah died, 28 after Manasseh crowned or ruled alone or can say 28 after Hez died which doesn't fit text. Hez died 686; Manasseh born 698, crowned immediately but age 12 when Hez died. Isaiah 53's timeline is based on that. But how does 42 fit here? And esp., 28? I can't make both fit.

The relevant chapters are 2Kings 21 and 2Chron33. But Daniel also benchmarked Manasseh and if memory serves, the benchmarks are different. If I go by Amon's AGE at accession, then Manasseh might have been captured by the Assyrians when he was only 26, which fits the 28 (698=28=672). But that doesn't fit what I remember from Daniel, tho I could have misparsed the meaning (sylls are okay). So after he repented and God restored him, he had Amon.

Then there's Isaiah 53's parsing of Manasseh, which I thought (perhaps wrongly) meant that Manasseh was captured at age 49. That doesn't fit the 28 at all. Unless the 28 references something else.

Datelines usually start with years from a past event. The second goes forward, but I've not seen that in the OT. All I've seen is years-from, and then somehow the TOTAL at the end fits into years-to, like Moses does with Genesis 1 and Psalm 90, using the TOTALs as prophetic balancing. Also, they seven. You seem to be using a Trinity meter style, which maybe exists but I've not checked it in the OT. Paul used Trinity meter with anaohora, but I've not seen other NT writers do that yet. Doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

In Timelines (which are not datelines) it's usually years-to, but Genesis 1 is all retrospective timeline. Or so it seems. I can't get a prospective timeline from Genesis 1 individual meters, only from the whole, an equidistant tie with Psalm 90, cuz 1350 years remain to birth of Messiah when Moses finishes each chapter.

brainout | 13 Apr 2017, 14:57

Here's your file in pdf, cuz it downloads from docx reversing the Hebrew, really hahaha to look at.

brainout | 13 Apr 2017, 15:38

It could be a forward dateline if he's tracking to Isaiah 53. But it still would have to 7. Also, if 609 (to warn of imminent invasion), 105 years prior is 714 BC which is Isaiah's dateline for Isaiah 53:1. So now I have to see if the 42 and 28 can somehow tie cuz that 105 is pretty definitive. In which case, maybe the datelines refer to prior prophets, not the king. For a Bible writer might date his book that way: Matthew dated from historical Nehemiah and from Malachai.

So if 609 it's composed to warn Josiah, who goes negative and goes against Pharaoh Neco, 2 Kings 23:29.

Click here for the BW9 copyo of ISBE article on how scholars think to date Zephaniah.

Now, if the early date is used, then Jeremiah's ministry hadn't begun yet, since Jer1:1 says his ministry began during the 13th year of Josiah (whether rulership or age, I'm not sure, haven't parsed the verse). So if Zeph makes no reference to Jeremiah, then the earlier date would be more relevant. If really 609, then something would have to be said about Jeremiah, who'd have begun earlier. If Jeremiah began when Josiah was AGE 13, then he'd have been king since age 8, so king for 5 years at that point. So that year would be 635. If when Josiah was in his 13th year of rule, then (roughly) Josiah would have just turned 21 in age, and it would have been (under Jeremiah), 627. Either of those dates is before Josiah's reforms which ISBE dates to 621.

On the other hand, God liking to use Two Witnesses so much, maybe Zeph prophesies as an independent at the end, the older guy, so that Jeremiah the younger one, gets a better hearing. Maybe Zeph dies soon after he talks, and Jer is to pick up from there, having already the ear of the king, but.. well, I'm guessing.

Jeremiah doesn't reference Zeph, either. The latter's great grandfather was King Hezekiah, so you'd think they'd know each other well, but maybe God didn't want any reference (except maybe in the meter, but I didn't check Jeremiah, Chronicles, or Lamentations for meter).

In any event, Jeremiah would have been alive. He's the son of Hilkiah the high priest (Jer1:1).

But Good news, the Daniel piece (search on 'age 41' in it) counts Manasseh's going bad and getting captured at age 42 (end of Isaiah 53:2, where the map says '133'). But I don't remember how I concluded that M stayed captured until age 49. Will keep researching.

brainout | 15 Apr 2017, 02:04

Helpful book: Basics of Biblical Hebrew Grammar By Gary D. Pratico Miles V. Van Pelt. Sadly, it's no longer available on Kindle (tho I thought it was). I have the hardback from years ago. It's out now in 2nd edition, and comes with a CD ROM, Basics of Biblical Hebrew Grammar, 2nd Edition Hardcover – January 1, 2007

Or, you can free-download an EXTRACT (or is it a workbook?) here:

Look at Chapter 3, syllabification.

Anonynomenon | 15 Apr 2017, 04:14

I updated the op with a new version of Zeph samex 1. This one is a bit more interesting. It has a total of 308 syllables, with a 77+77 dateline. Then, by Josiah's name in vs 1, 33 syllables. That's actually what I had been hoping for as Josiah died 33 years after Manasseh died.

Then, the 42 became a 41, which ties more precisely to Manasseh being captured. There's no more 105, but maybe it wasn't really intended.

brainout | 17 Apr 2017, 02:23

I'm still having trouble with the 154. And it seems to me the 127 should be 126 to tag Isaiah, but it's just a hunch.

John's Meter

brainout | 17 Nov 2015, 00:40

John's meter is extremely helpful, since he knows he's the last Bible writer, and so has to incorporate by reference all prior Divine Writ. Sadly for us, our forebears didn't pass on what they learned when this style was known all over the ancient world, at least by those educated in Scripture. So we have to back into it. Happily for us, God preserved THE REAL BIBLE, not merely some translation, so we have the original words to parse.

John has a distinctive style of using EACH clause parsing, whether it sevens or not, to elucidate his text. Paul did that on occasion, but John does it every time. What's most astonishing about his use of the meter, is how he switches dateline formulas between Christ's Age (shoulda-been or actual, which had been the standard measure since Mary used it), and the Adamic or sacred year since Adam's fall. Makes it real easy to pinpoint what dates he has in mind. That matters, so you know what his otherwise-generic text, specifically targets. Drole.

John's simple but profound writing style is reflected in the meter.


So this analysis is very rough, first draft. The only thing 'conclusive' about it, is to demonstrate that meter is a valid rhetorical style. Whether the meter shown is correctly parsed, well.. you decide. It's a forensic task, so doesn't need the blessing of some hoary head, though I'd sure like to find someone 'respectable' who's done such analysis. Alas, so far, I find no one else. I wanted to post this in B-Greek but they require your real name.

So please be skeptical, use 1John1:9 and parse/test before God.

So I did videos on his meter, and the doc is here: JohnDatelineMeters.pdf. You can substitute htm or doc format if you prefer.

Here's the playlist, which vimeo sadly won't allow to embed.

There are important variants in each of the three writings, Gospel, 1John (I didn't meter 2 or 3John), and Rev. These are deal-breakers for the meter, so detail on them is provided. I used the CNTTS apparatus in BW9, and the videos cover the variants in some detail.

Rev plays a lot on Paul's Ephesians meter, so you'll have to get into that latter, as well.

* Just because a thing is scheduled, doesn't mean it will happen that way. As also true in the OT, 2100 years was allotted for the goyim, 2100 for the Jews, but it could have not finished, if volition were negative. Here, it SEEMS the Mill is still scheduled for Chanukah as a birthday present to Christ, with the clear implication being that the Trib is slated to begin on Chanukah, too. But 'slated' is not 'promised'. And the other thing is, when John wrote, it still could have happened that way. But now? Who knows. So the meter tells us what was expected pre-Church, at a minimum. Might be telling us what God aims at, but via which Will? Permissive? Directive? Overriding? After all, a birthday present can be given late or early, too.

But it doesn't have to begin then. The Mill doesn't have to begin then. It's not a promise of Time, but of Bodies, Eph 4:12-13, so it actually begins when it actually begins.

Anonynomenon | 12 Aug 2017, 05:45

I was comparing John 1:1 to Genesis 1:1, and I realized the first lines in each total at 16.

Gen 1:1 is currently elided as follows:


בְּרֵאשִׁ֖ית בָּרָ֣א אֱלֹהִ֑ים אֵ֥ת הַשָּׁמַ֖יִם וְאֵ֥ת הָאָֽרֶץ׃

That brings it to 16 syllables, however, look at the current parsing for John 1:1...


Ἐν ἀρχῇ ἦν ὁ Λόγος,

7 Syllables


καὶ ὁ Λόγος ἦν πρὸς τὸν Θεόν

9 Syllables

What if we try replicating John's style in Gen 1? (or really, it would be John playing on Moses.)


בְּרֵאשִׁ֖ית בָּרָ֣א אֱלֹהִ֑ים

7 Syllables


אֵ֥ת הַשָּׁמַ֖יִם וְאֵ֥ת הָאָֽרֶץ׃

9 Syllables

This time, the aleph in Elohim is swallowed, since the aleph in bara precedes it, and in hashamayim , the ai is pronounced as a diphthong. We still have 16 syllables, but now it looks like John 1:1 is following Gen 1:1's rhythm.

I realize that Gen 1:1 is one full clause. So I'm not saying that it should be broken down or that the dateline should be 7. I just think that John might be following along with the cadence of Gen 1:1, as he cleverly subdivides the meter.

brainout | 12 Aug 2017, 11:18

Actually, that might mean Gen1:1 first sevens AT seven. The cadence is the same in John1:1 when you read it. That would explain why there IS hiatus in John 1:1, which bugged me. Problem is, to change sylls in shamayim then must be repeated in all other instances where it occurs. Will that work?

Pretending it does, that would mean Moses first benchmarks something from seven years prior. Should be in the books of Numbers and/or Exodus. Will have to find out what that is. The other meter still stands. 7, though, would be first. Should be related to the Temple, which in Moses' day might be the completion of the Tabernacle? Or something about RE-doing the Tabernacle? Dunno.

David's Last Words, 2Sam23 DATELINE METER

brainout | 01 Apr 2017, 10:06

There's actually a book on this meter, The Last Words of David, Divided According to the Metre. with Notes Critical and Explanatory. by Richard Grey. But the book doesn't seem to recognize the sevening, which is very prominent in David's meter. It matters, cuz millions of dollars have been WASTED due to folks misaccounting David's age at death; whole Bible is built around this, so if you miss his birth and death and years ruled, you'll get all your Bible dates in contradiction.

I don't know why the writer of the book in 1749 (!) didn't think to chart the meter for David's age, cuz it couldn't have escaped his notice: David uses FIVE 14s in a row, which is 70 (ding ding ding) then a 7 then another 7 to equal 84. It's all poetic, with soundplay, rhythm, so why didn't the guy notice David was writing when AGE 77 not age 70 as errant Josephus had long contended and dilatory scholars long accepted?

If we would just do our homework in BIBLE, then we'd save so much money, the poor would be fed and our sheep would get proper DOCTRINE so God could justify blessing US all to get even more money. Leviticus 26 and Deuteronomy 28, baby.

Here's my homework on the dateline: 2Sam23.pdf. It will be updated when I've time to do more work on it. See for yourself.

brainout | 11 Apr 2017, 20:10

Here's a video made on how one might differently parse verse 1 yet still get 42 (which the author of the 1749 book also shows for the verse, in his transliteration but NOT translation:

Anonynomenon | 12 Apr 2017, 00:33

I watched the video. I can see why you elided and parsed the way you did. While watching, I started playing with that first verse some more, with alternate clause parsing. Here is what I got (2 Sam 23:1).

Clause 1:


וְאֵ֛לֶּה דִּבְרֵ֥י דָוִ֖ד הָאַֽחֲרֹנִ֑ים

11 Syllables

We'lleh divrei Dawid, hA'acharonim.

Note that even though the syllable count is an odd number, the long 'a' in hA'acharonim can preserve the cadence. This of course means that the text must be accented according to the vowel lengths indicated by the vowel points. Also, Zephaniah opens with 11 syllables, as well.


דְּבַ>ר־יְהוָ֣ה ׀ אֲשֶׁ֣ר הָיָ֗ה אֶל־צְפַנְיָה֙

I compared the grammatical structure of this proposed clause to that of 1 Chronicles 23:27. I don't see why this cant stand alone as a clause, but maybe I'm parsing it incorrectly.

Clause 2:


נְאֻ֧ם דָּוִ֣ד בֶּן־יִשַׁ֗י וּנְאֻ֤ם הַגֶּ֙בֶר֙ הֻ֣קַם עָ֔ל מְשִׁ֙יחַ֙

19 Syllables

Ne'um Dawid, ben-Yishai une'um haggever haqom 'al meshiach.

I think ne'um starts a new clause for the same reason that Zephaniah uses it for God's declaration, "ne'um Yehwah".

Furthermore, Matt 24:31a, and Mark 13:1b use 19 syllables for what seems to be a declaration or announcement. I'll have to see if 19 is consistently used that way.

Clause 3:


אֱלֹהֵ֣י יַֽעֲקֹ֔ב וּנְעִ֖ים זְמִרֹ֥ות יִשְׂרָאֵֽל׃

12 Syllables

'lohei Ya'qov un'im zemorowth Yishra'el.

This one is pretty straightforward. "My God of Jacob, and the sweet psalmist of Israel." Twelve is the number of Israel as stated in the video.

So 11+19+12=42.

I'm only making these observations based on what I've seen in other verses and meters. I haven't even taken the time to look at Ecclesiastes again yet, so I have no idea what effect these elisions and parsing will have on that meter.

Let me know what you think. If my grammar is wrong, please let me know, cuz I'm still at an introductory level in Hebrew grammar.

brainout | 12 Apr 2017, 01:03

Okay, well


MUST be two syllables, minimum. Question is whether it's 3, in 2nd word of 2Sam23; the 1749 book uses two (dibre), as you'll see if you look at the jpg. I think three, but that's due to the NAME that comes from it, and the fact the verbal noun is plural, since even in the singular it must be at least two syllables, but now we have a plural suffix added.

So now you have to rethink Zeph. Really should be 12. You can't piggyback a begadpekat onto another with no vowel sound between, esp. when hard. So if two such consonants, then two syllables, minimum.

Hebrew Syllables - Introduction to the dagashim

Anonynomenon | 12 Apr 2017, 05:52

After fixing Zeph 1, I noticed that he ended Samex 1 with a 12+15+15, which is the mirror image of your 15+15+12 in 2 Sam. So I guess that gives more support for your parsing and elisions. I wonder if there is a special significance for that specific number sequence?

brainout | 12 Apr 2017, 07:19

Dunno. But the 42 is a common enough meter. Not sure what I did in 2Sam23 is right, either.

Alternative parsing for Isaiah 52-53

Anonynomenon | 17 May 2018, 03:52

Still working on datelines. Just making the document available.

Aligning Days of Week w/Christ's Death

brainout | 01 May 2016, 13:17

I didn't know where else to put this, so plopping it in Contradictions, since all the hoary heads keep on lying about 'Good Friday' when it was really Good WEDNESDAY: can't be anything else, as the Lord rose of the 1st day of the week (Saturday after sundown, which is FIRSTFRUITS under the Law, Numbers 28:26, piggybacked on the LAST DAY of Passover week). And, by that point He had been THREE DAYS AND THREE NIGHTS in the grave (both days and nights), Matt 12:40-41.

Therefore official Passover ran four days too fast, they were using lunisolar and didn't intercalate. Thus the Lord could EAT the (officially-dated) Passover the PRIOR SATURDAY NIGHT yet BE the Passover (dying on the correct date per Exodus 12, four days after being set aside/arrested, see the witty use of paraskeue verses). So could rise the following SATURDAY NIGHT after (official) Passover Week ended. Hence 'Christ Our Firstfruits' and 'Christ Our Passover' (both should be quotes from Paul).

So it's Good WEDNESDAY, 30 AD April 4 then (14th day after vernal equinox, local Jeru time that year). I can easily understand how ancient 'catholics' messed it up, cuz they didn't know what was a 'high sabbath' (see John 19), since they never bothered to learn the OT (their ideas about what Jewish law was, are ridiculous). But it's now 2016, and this ancient mistake should have been corrected.

But the Jews don't calculate Passover or their calendar rightly, either. Oh well. No one bothers to READ THE BIBLE (duh, Israel's BIRTHDAY was initial Passover, so it's only a solar year beginning on the vernal equinox, Exo12). Oh well.

So: 1986 years have passed since He died. And He died just BEFORE sundown, and at sundown it's a new day per Bible, so becomes Thursday at sundown on Wednesday. First night.

So for our purposes, we divide 1986/7 and get 283.7142857142857 . Taking the remainder, we get .7142857142857 times 7, 5 days.

April 3, 2016 a SUNDAY (which was erroneously called EASTER, lol) was the 14th day after the vernal equinox, here in the US. We are about 8 hours behind Israel; for her, the VE occurred after sundown in 2016. So for her, April 3 would be April 4 (after sundown), a.. 'Monday'.

So look: 5 days from Wednesday becoming Thursday, original Crucifixion of 'our' April 3 in 2016 is.. MONDAY.

So Thank God, there are no missing years between the Crucifixion and now. I've been wondering how to test that, since 2010!

This same question drove the early Romans nuts. Our BC/AD problem is sourced in the bad Varro calendar all the Romans used (and today's ancient Roman historians still use).. which erroneously puts SPQR's 'age' at 753 BC when Christ was born. No, it was the end of 750 or 749, depending on what fiscal is used (Roman, autumnal or vernal). He was born at the end of the Roman year, which Paul jokes about using Greek Chronos, in Gal 4:4. Roman name for that god-who-ate-his-kids-when-born, was Saturn. As in, Saturnalia.

ELUL (not Adar, took me forever to figure this out).. was the month for intercalation, add 5 or 6 days (end of CIVIL year, not sacred). Do that, and you have exactly the space you need to reach the autumnal equinox, on time. All other days are 30, to fit the 24-hour schedule David designed for the priestly courses, in 1Chron24.

Your thoughts?

Anonynomenon | 02 May 2016, 02:04

Quote @brainout

ELUL (not Adar, took me forever to figure this out).. was the month for intercalation, add 5 or 6 days (end of CIVIL year, not sacred). Do that, and you have exactly the space you need to reach the autumnal equinox, on time. All other days are 30, to fit the 24-hour schedule David designed for the priestly courses, in 1Chron24.

I'm not completely convinced that these two statements are accurate, though I don't know of a way to test them one way or another.

God told Israel that 1 Aviv (vernal equinox) was day 1 of the solar year, so I would expect Adar to be the long month. Your argument seems to hinge on the fact that God flipped the calendar for Noah at the Flood. I do not disagree with that....however, how do we know that the calendar didn't experience a previous flip at the Fall of Adam??? As far as I know, Rosh Hashanah is not Biblical terminology.

Secondly, on the priestly shifts, each of the 24 priests served a total of 14 days. The shifts seemed to have changed every 7 days, on the Sabbath. So 24x14=336. That falls 29 days short of a solar year. So maybe the priestly shifts rotated continuously, regardless of the calendar.


2Chron 23: 8So the Levites and all Judah did according to all that Jehoiada the priest commanded. And each one of them took his men who were to come in on the sabbath, with those who were to go out on the sabbath, for Jehoiada the priest did not dismiss any of the divisions.

brainout | 02 May 2016, 04:07

7.5 days times 2. And Elul works because it's the end of the CIVIL year, which pertained prior to Israel at the exodus. That's why Exo 12 reads that Aviv will be the first month. Autumnal equinox HAD BEEN the fiscal. So its last month is Elul, not Adar, which is instead the last month of the sacred year. See Luke 1:26 and 1:36, where you find that the civil calendar was used (yeah, Mary was royal), so the sixth month was Adar. Nine months later.. is Chislev. Ding ding ding.

See the link to the video in my last post, first video there, PATU shows how the Elul being the last month aligns the time so that autumnal equinox still begins rightly for Ethanim/Tishri

Anonynomenon | 02 May 2016, 04:38

Ok. I get the Priestly cycles now.

But I don't see how Luke 1:26-36 establishes Trumpets on the Autumnal Equinox. I get that Mary was pregnant from Elul to Chislev. That part we can both agree on, but I think it can still go either way until a smoking gun is found.

brainout | 02 May 2016, 05:07

NO, ELIZABETH was pregnant on Elul. Remember the 1Chron24 service of Zecharias was in Ziv, 1Chron24:10. Actually, it's that info which tipped me off to the whole PassPlot.htm structure. Back in 2003 or prior, a fellow Thiemite, I forget his name now, he and Genez and I were all arguing to defend Thieme against a nutter in Rick Ross forum (which is anti-Thieme); the fellow Thiemite and I later traded a lot of info. HE is the one who brought up the course of Abijah, which Zecharias belonged to (see also 1Kings 6, for it's a Zivk/Bul service).

The rest, as they say, is history. I've never been the same since.

The smoking gun, is Elul. Six months after it is Adar, probably Purim, so the play on '6th month' is important. In Luke 1:26 two def articles (so the calendar official) but in 1:36, no articles (so relative to when Gabriel talks to Mary). So it can ONLY be Adar (verse 26, official month, royal/civil calendar).

Anonynomenon | 02 May 2016, 05:40

Ok. I see what you mean about the def articles, the month the sixth, however, Trumpets is called the first day of the Seventh month in OT. So in the case of Israel, Adar was the last month, not Elul.

In the case that you are making, Elul is the last month, not Adar. I understand, and I agree. What I'm saying is that we should not rule out the possibility that the calendar may have been flipped more than once;

From Eden to Fall--Vernal
From Fall to Flood--Autumnal
From Flood to Ransom (Israel's birth)--Vernal
First will be last and/then last will be first.

brainout | 02 May 2016, 17:57

Well, you have to look at all the dating and the periods used, in the OT. Autumnal equinox STARTS the civil year, 1Kings 9. Temple dedication is tied to it. Sacred year exists for Israel too, Exo 12. So now think: Mary is royal, Elizabeth is Levite, so in order for it to be ELIZABETH's six month, Gabriel has to be talking to Mary in Adar. For we know Christ has to be born on Chanukah, Haggai 2. The math doesn't work another way. So John is born on Pentecost, which absent intercalation for two or three years, means Chanukah is the 'opposite' on the calendar.

Of course, Chanukah week was at the end of the Roman year, which Paul plays on using Chronos=Saturn, in Greek of Gal 4:4. Then you have the LIGHTS in Luke, the CROWDS in Matthew, etc. Because it would be so well known to the initial audience, they wouldn't need to have anyone say 'Chanukah'.

So you have the Tale of Two Fiscals: Autumnal equinox 'fiscal' ends in Elul. Vernal equinox 'fiscal' ends in Adar. Only if you use the Autumnal fiscal, does Elul become the last month, add the 5-6 days, and then EXACTLY ON TIME the next equinox arrives. Else, it doesn't. Again, the math doesn't work another way.

Turkey as New Rome and Erdogan's speech?

brainout | 09 Dec 2015, 15:56

Erdogan's speech recorded and commented on by, click here.

Walid Shoebat is famous among evangelical Christians for contending that Revelation 17 is about Islam. So the article above is talking back to that theme. His latest article on that theme centers on Trump's call for banning Muslim entry, here.

Since Constantine built New Rome (now Istanbul) with seven hills, I can't wholly rule out Shoebat's interp.

What do you think?

Anonynomenon | 09 Dec 2015, 16:39

I think "they" are just messing with us the same way they did with the initial 10 EU nations. Zeph 2, Isa 47, and Rev 17 or 18 all confirm that Mystery Babylon is revived Nineveh IMO, so the 7 Hills are the 7 historical kings/empires that ruled over Chaldea and the Levant (in reality, 5 past and 2 to come). Rome was but one of those hills.

So again IMO, one so inclined to watch should be looking for the revived consolidation of the Levant and Chaldea, not necessarily Rome.

brainout | 09 Dec 2015, 17:31

Then why is there nothing in Rev about Islam, prior? Mind you, John might have metered something as an addition to Paul's Eph1:3-14, which ends with Odovacer. Rev 1 ending meter is 364, but I'm not sure whether John's carrying forward the annual timeline Paul started, or whether he's just metaphorically playing on both Paul and Daniel 9, Isaiah 53 (Paul's 434=364+70, and 490 = 364+126, and 126 = 70+56, prominent in Isaiah 53).

We need more evidence on this. The King of the West, remember. So the headquarters has to be WEST of Jerusalem. The king is of the same ethnos am who took down the 2nd Temple. So that kinda rules out Ninevah?

Bible doesn't actually use the term king of the west, but instead uses the Seleucids. Their headquarters was west of Jerusalem.

So how do you resolve those issues?

Granted, Islam is such a big thing we ought to find prophecy on it. So then where is it, and how can we vet what we think we find?

Anonynomenon | 09 Dec 2015, 18:49

Well, I've never been a big believer of the Islamic Antichrist or Islamic False Prophet, but it would fit nicely. It is alleged that Allah is an adoption of Ba'al, and we see Ba'al being worshipped in Zeph 1 during the 70th Week. Personally, I would expect the Antichrist to be pushing a Judeo-Chrislamic mix that would be all inclusive for all world religions. Just look into Islamic escatology: Mahdi, Prophet Isa and the returning Dajjal. Its the mirror opposite of Biblical escatology.

A lot of the confusion IMO over the Western RRE theory is resolved when you understand that Daniel 11 is about the Antichrist, not the False Prophet. The first half of Dan 11 is about Antiochus. He is the Seleucid Beast who consolidated Chaldea and the Levant. So the last half of Daniel 11 is done to parallel Antiochus as the trend setter. Once we look at it from that perspective, the king of the West cannot be the Antichrist. The Antichrist is the king of the North.

I think Zeph 2 is pretty bold about Nineveh, compare it to Rev 18 and Isaiah 47:7.


Zeph 2:13 And he will stretch out his hand against the north, and destroy Assyria; and will make Nineveh a desolation, and dry like a wilderness.
14 And flocks shall lie down in the midst of her, all the beasts of the nations: both the cormorant and the bittern shall lodge in the upper lintels of it; their voice shall sing in the windows; desolation shall be in the thresholds: for he shall uncover the cedar work.
15 This is the rejoicing city that dwelt carelessly, that said in her heart, I am, and there is none beside me: how is she become a desolation, a place for beasts to lie down in! every one that passeth by her shall hiss, and wag his hand.

Isaiah 47:7 And thou saidst, I shall be a lady for ever: so that thou didst not lay these things to thy heart, neither didst remember the latter end of it.
8 Therefore hear now this, thou that art given to pleasures, that dwellest carelessly, that sayest in thine heart, I am, and none else beside me; I shall not sit as a widow, neither shall I know the loss of children:
9 But these two things shall come to thee in a moment in one day, the loss of children, and widowhood: they shall come upon thee in their perfection for the multitude of thy sorceries, and for the great abundance of thine enchantments.

Rev 18:7 How much she hath glorified herself, and lived deliciously, so much torment and sorrow give her: for she saith in her heart, I sit a queen, and am no widow, and shall see no sorrow.
8 Therefore shall her plagues come in one day, death, and mourning, and famine; and she shall be utterly burned with fire: for strong is the Lord God who judgeth her.

Paul and John made references to Rome, because that is what consolitated the Levant and Chaldea in their day. So Rome was a Beast Empire and might be in the future, but it doesn't have to be.

brainout | 09 Dec 2015, 20:32

King of the North moving steadily westward, geographically for the Man of Time. So that's why conventional Christianity says 'King of the West'.

TWO Anti-christs, not one. The above is the Gentile one, and there is a Jewish one, who later is dubbed the false prophet in Rev 13ff.

So the problem is that the Zeph 2 prophecy about Assyria being destroyed, already came true. So parallel in nature to EVER DEAD Nineveh, some other entity also arrogating the same idea of ever living. But not Nineveh, geographically. The Isaiah and Rev prophecies don't say Nineveh as the location, but Rev says 'seven hills', and Daniel never says Nineveh will rise again, but rather a westward-moving set of 'beasts', ending with the same people who will take down the Temple in the future, which is the last beast, and we know her name: Rome.

But new Rome or old?

See, that's where the traditional Christian interp of Catholicism gets its impetus. New Rome, built by Constantine, then for 1000 years and even until now, extant still occupying OLD Rome, but used to occupy both.

When you get to Rev 17 you'll hear Thieme speculate that maybe it's not Catholicism, but yeah some pretend-Christian idea, so Chrislam isn't ruled out, either.

Anonynomenon | 09 Dec 2015, 21:09

To my recollection, Zeph 2 is about the Day of the Lord, so it literally says that Nineveh is yet future. Then Isaiah 14:4-28 discusses the fate of the king of Babylon and the king of Assyria. Again, if I remember correctly, it is a future event.

Can you prove that Zeph 2 is not future, or that its being figurative?

Anonynomenon | 09 Dec 2015, 21:16


Isaiah 14:1When the LORD will have compassion on Jacob and again choose Israel, and settle them in their own land, then strangers will join them and attach themselves to the house of Jacob. 2The peoples will take them along and bring them to their place, and the house of Israel will possess them as an inheritance in the land of the LORD as male servants and female servants; and they will take their captors captive and will rule over their oppressors.

Isaiah 14 is about a time when God will let both Judah and Israel dwell in the land.

brainout | 10 Dec 2015, 05:50

Okay, but Isaiah 14 isn't on Nineveh, and the Zeph 2 passage does not say ON or AT THE TIME OF the Day of the Lord, but 'before'(Zeph 2:2). Next, where are the parallel passages tying the end of Assyria to the Day of the Lord?

Rather, Isaiah 38:6, all of Chapter 39 (allusively, for Babylon would destroy Assyria), 43:14 (on using Babylon to save Israel) are on the end of Assyria. Jeremiah uses Assyria in the past tense, as now it's Babylon who oppresses Israel. That parallel continues through Jeremiah 50, which still talks about Assyria in the past tense, no claim she will revive. Same with Ezekiel 23, 27, 31.

It matters, as Zephaniah, Jeremiah, and Ezekiel were all of the same generation of prophets. Z and J were ministering to Josiah, and in the 2nd deportation a generation in time later, while J was still alive, E is ministering to those already taken away (1st and 2nd deportations), contemporaneous with Daniel. So E is talking in the past tense that Z had already promised, and J was chronicling, so by the time you get to J 50, well...

So now how to account for all of that?

Anonynomenon | 10 Dec 2015, 16:57

Ok, I understand what you're saying, but I haven't the time at this moment to address all of your points.

However, look at Jeremiah 50.


Jeremiah 50:4“In those days, at that time,”
declares the Lord,
“the people of Israel and the people of Judah together
will go in tears to seek the Lord their God.

Jeremiah 50:6“My people have been lost sheep;
their shepherds have led them astray
and caused them to roam on the mountains.
They wandered over mountain and hill
and forgot their own resting place.

Again, Jeremiah is talking about gathering both Israel and Judah from Babylon. Historically, Israel fell to Assyria and Judah to Babylon. Only Judah rebounded, only to fall again to Rome.

BUT the Regathering Of Judah and Israel into one solid Rod (valley of dry bones) will not happen until the Day of the Lord.

So it seems that both Babylon and Nineveh have two falls: one in the past, and a permanent fall at in the end (never to return again).

brainout | 10 Dec 2015, 19:57

Well, when you get a chance and are in the mood, please show me where in Bible it says that either Babylon or Nineveh revive. Just because Israel and Judah are regathered at 2nd Advent, doesn't mean that Babylon and Nineveh ever revive. Nor do I find any prophecy saying so. Jerusalem is called 'Babylon', and Peter wrote from territory which used to be in the Babylonian Empire, but no one I can find says it revives. Daniel 2-12 precludes that, each Empire dying.. right?

Anonynomenon | 10 Dec 2015, 21:33

Well Jeremiah 50 does compare the destruction of CHALDEA AND BABYLON to the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah. We are told that when it happens, no men we even pass through it. The only thing dwelling in it will be wild animals from generation to generation (Jer 50:35-39). At this point, there are still people living in Iraq, so that implies that Chaldea and Babylon will have to rise again to face that level of destruction. Read Nahum 2-3, it sounds like its straight out of Rev 17 and 18. So Nineveh would be the new Babylon ruling over revived Chaldea.

I'll comment some more later.

brainout | 10 Dec 2015, 22:32

Okay, when you're in the mood, please do. For Jeremiah 50 is being said during Babylon's taking over Israel, and it's about the restoration of the Temple. Which happened 70 years later, just as Jer 25 and 29 predicted, just as Daniel prayed in the 70th year of his own captivity (since he was in the first deportation). Daniel was the guy given the timeline of Babylon's destruction, and Jeremiah and Ezekiel predicted it also. Daniel was the guy who actually LIVED THROUGH that destruction, so how is it that Jeremiah 50 isn't talking forward to Daniel, and Daniel fulfills Jeremiah?

Anonynomenon | 11 Dec 2015, 04:34

Its not an issue of mood, it's an issue of time. I post from a mobile device from work, on my 15 minute breaks and lunch hour. I've grown accustom to short burst thinking. Please don't mistake that for apathy.


Micah 5:2 “But as for you, Bethlehem Ephrathah,
Too little to be among the clans of Judah,
From you One will go forth for Me to be ruler in Israel.
His goings forth are from long ago,
From the days of eternity.”

3Therefore He will give them up until the time
When she who is in labor has borne a child.
Then the remainder of His brethren
Will return to the sons of Israel.

Here we see Christ born from Judah in Bethlehem.


Micah 5:4 And He will arise and shepherd His flock
In the strength of the LORD,
In the majesty of the name of the LORD His God.
And they will remain,
Because at that time He will be great
To the ends of the earth.

Christ will shepherd His flock and they will remain, in that time. Looks like a time stamp to me: Second Advent and forward.


Micah 5:5This One will be our peace.
When the Assyrian invades our land,
When he tramples on our citadels,
Then we will raise against him
Seven shepherds and eight leaders of men.

This "One" (Christ) will be the peace of His flock when the Assyrian enters the Land. I realize that Assyria attempted to conquer Jerusalem and failed, but I think this prophecy is still pending complete fulfillment. See the next verse.


Micah 5:6They will shepherd the land of Assyria with the sword,
The land of Nimrod at its entrances;
And He will deliver us from the Assyrian
When he attacks our land
And when he tramples our territory

Christ will deliver them from the Assyrian. Nineveh was part of Nimrod's land. If this prophecy still has a future portion to be fulfilled, then that means some of Nimrod's land must be revived for one last time. Couple that with Zeph 2, and you have revived Nineveh.

So it seems to me that Jeremiah 50 and Micah 5 and possibly Nahum 1-3 all have dual fulfillment quality: past and future.

If you disagree then please explain:

  1. Why Jeremiah 50:4 states that "in those days" both Israel and Judah will believe. This is something that will only take place in mass at the return of Christ. This looks like another Time Stamp.
  2. Why Jeremiah 50:35-39 says that the entire land of Chaldea will be left totally desolate and uninhabited from "generation to generation", yet today, Chaldea is full of people. Time Stamp.
  3. Where is Rome specifically said to be revived? All I see is revived Chaldea throughout history.

brainout | 11 Dec 2015, 05:24

LOL no one would ever think you apathetic. I just feel bad constantly objecting to what you say, so if you want to ignore my objections, please do.

That being said, lessseee... okay, well still the Micah prophecy doesn't work. You can't say it only references Christ at 2nd Advent. God defends. Micah's ministry was contemporaneous with Isaiah. See, that's the problem. Where in Isaiah or any of the contemporaries, is there any prediction that Babylon and/or Nineveh will rise again. They all say DOWN, but no up.

Daniel has no 'up', either.

Anonynomenon | 11 Dec 2015, 05:50

Well, don't worry about objecting. I come here because I know you are objective so I use it to refine my thinking.

Neither Jeremiah, Micah, or Nahum would be exclusive to the past or the Day of the Lord alone. I would expect them to be doubled. For example, Antiochus Epiphanes and the 70th Week's Abomination of Desolation. Or the flood of invaders outside of Jerusalem around 70 AD vs the flood of invaders during the Tribulation.

Its like the prophecies unfold in stages or cycles (for lack of a better term).

Like I said Babylon and Chaldea never faced the level of destruction that Jeremiah 50-51 predicted. The ruins of Babylon are still intact. Its walls which should have been leveled are still there. Babylon should have been a charred heap, but it doesn't seem to be the case. I think that needs to be explained before Revived Rome can be considered as a possibility.

brainout | 11 Dec 2015, 13:33

Okay, great. I appreciate your willingness to keep at it.

So back to Jeremiah 50: the prediction for them to be going back to Israel to rebuild the Temple. That's been the theme since Jeremiah 25. And indeed, they were IN Babylon when they did that, going through devastated land. So the entire land wasn't uninhabited. Even in Peter's day, he was there.

That they would be asking for the way to Zion cannot mean the 2nd Advent, either, for the same reason: Israel is inhabited, too. They would already know the way to Zion. God would be gathering them there.

Verses 9-10 don't say that Babylon and Chaldea will become permanently uninhabited, but will be defeated.


Jeremiah 50:1 The word which the LORD spoke concerning Babylon, the land of the Chaldeans, through Jeremiah the prophet:
2 "Declare and proclaim among the nations. Proclaim it and lift up a standard. Do not conceal it but say, 'Babylon has been captured, Bel has been put to shame, Marduk has been shattered; Her images have been put to shame, her idols have been shattered.'
3 "For a nation has come up against her out of the north; it will make her land an object of horror, and there will be no inhabitant in it. Both man and beast have wandered off, they have gone away!
4 "In those days and at that time," declares the LORD, "the sons of Israel will come, both they and the sons of Judah as well; they will go along weeping as they go, and it will be the LORD their God they will seek.
5 "They will ask for the way to Zion, turning their faces in its direction; they will come that they may join themselves to the LORD in an everlasting covenant that will not be forgotten.
6 "My people have become lost sheep; Their shepherds have led them astray. They have made them turn aside on the mountains; They have gone along from mountain to hill And have forgotten their resting place.
7 "All who came upon them have devoured them; And their adversaries have said, 'We are not guilty, Inasmuch as they have sinned against the LORD who is the habitation of righteousness, Even the LORD, the hope of their fathers.'
8 "Wander away from the midst of Babylon And go forth from the land of the Chaldeans; Be also like male goats at the head of the flock.
9 "For behold, I am going to arouse and bring up against Babylon A horde of great nations from the land of the north, And they will draw up their battle lines against her; From there she will be taken captive. Their arrows will be like an expert warrior Who does not return empty-handed.
10 "Chaldea will become plunder; All who plunder her will have enough," declares the LORD.

Anonynomenon | 11 Dec 2015, 17:05

I agree with your assessment, but still, I think you are overlooking this:


Jeremiah 50:35“A sword against the Chaldeans,” declares the LORD,
“And against the inhabitants of Babylon And against her officials and her wise men!

36“A sword against the oracle priests, and they will become fools!
A sword against her mighty men, and they will be shattered!

37“A sword against their horses and against their chariots
And against all the foreigners who are in the midst of her,
And they will become women!
A sword against her treasures, and they will be plundered!

38“A drought on her waters, and they will be dried up!
For it is a land of idols,
And they are mad over fearsome idols.

39“Therefore the desert creatures will live there along with the jackals;
The ostriches also will live in it,
And it will never again be inhabited
Or dwelt in from generation to generation.


brainout | 11 Dec 2015, 18:06

Yes, and that came true already. Don't you remember, for centuries no one even believed Babylon existed because there was no evidence.

Verse 39 tells you it will not rise again. Iraq is not Babylon.

Anonynomenon | 12 Dec 2015, 01:45

You're right. Sorry for bing so stubborn, but you are right. I had to dig around in Babylonian history to see it, and now I realized that Nineveh cannot rise again either, so that leaves us with Revived Rome.

I do think Revive Byzantium makes more sense than Western Rome, I mean even Catholicism has its roots in Byzantium.

brainout | 12 Dec 2015, 01:57

Well, you're still maybe targeting the right place and idea, but with the wrong label? Just thinking out loud, here. Not trying to shoot you down, but like you're doing, to fine-tune the meaning.

I'm not sure what is the right meaning, but 'seven hills' means a play on Rome. But after that, well I don't know.

Anonynomenon | 12 Dec 2015, 02:32

Yeah, seven heads are seven hills, which might suggest Rome, but remember that the seven heads are also seven king/kingdoms.

My guess is those heads all ruled (or will rule) Chaldea at some point:

  1. Babel
  2. Assyria
  3. Babylon
  4. Medo-Persia
  5. Seleucus
  6. Rome ("one is" in John's day)
  7. Short Interim (coming for a short space)
  8. Revived Byzantine Rome (the 8th is of the 7th)


Rev 17:10 And there are seven kings: five are fallen, and one is, and the other is not yet come; and when he cometh, he must continue a short space.

11 And the beast that was, and is not, even he is the eighth, and is of the seven, and goeth into perdition.

Anonynomenon | 12 Dec 2015, 05:08

I was just listening to RBT lesson 467-0067 on Rev 2:6. He was talking about Rome's origins in Asia Minor and how it eventually became the pivot site for the 7 Churches. Maybe the 7 Churches have a relationship to the 7 Hills.

Also, I originally thought that Gog of Magog was another title for the Antichrist (comparing him to Gyges the conqueror). I don't know what Thieme taught, but I think the land of Magog is present day Turkey and not Russia. If any of that can be proven true, that might be a smoking gun on what Revived Rome might look like.

brainout | 12 Dec 2015, 05:32

Yeah, if I recall both Arabs and Russia. Arabs are King of the South. But it depends on who's in control during that time.

You might be onto something with the 7-8 listing. I'd say Alexander instead of Seleucids, but it's close enough. Selecus was a general, part of the Diadochi, as was Ptolemy.

Anonynomenon | 12 Dec 2015, 06:00

There's a big debate over whether Meshech, Tubal, Rosh, etc are part of Russia or Turkey. I think Turkey based on what I've read, but I'm not a historian.

The list I made with the 8 kingdoms, I based off of Antichrist like figures mentioned throughout the Bible where similar diction to Revelation 17&18 exists. So my updated list is this:

  1. Babel: Nimrod (Micah 5 Land of Nimrod)
  2. Assyria: Sennacherib (Micah 5:5, Nahum 1, Zeph 2)
  3. Babylon: Nebuchadnezzar (Jer 50, Isa 47)
  4. Medo-Persia: Ahasuerus (Esther; had he listened to Haman he would have been a Beast)
  5. Seleucus: Antiochus Epiphanes (Daniel 11)
  6. Rome: Domitian
  7. Interim: ?
  8. Revived Byzantium:

brainout | 14 Dec 2015, 14:43

Possible deployment of your last post: Islamic State Presents: The End of the World Video

Note the two Romes.

Also here, note the factions in the fight: Syria’s Deadly War is Hostage to Geography

Anonynomenon | 14 Dec 2015, 16:31

Well, since America is close to the Fifth Cycle, then it is very likely that the Caliphate will be raised up as the most evil nation to execute the Fifth Cycle. If (maybe/maybe not) America is the last client nation of Church, then the Caliphate under its Caliphe could be the 7th Head (for a short while) until the tranistion to Revived Rome is completed for the 8th Head (with the healed wound).

It seems that Rome began in Asia minor, it became the first Client Nation in Asia Minor, and may well be the final Beast in Asia Minor. That would be very poetic.

Anonynomenon | 16 Dec 2015, 02:59

Shoebat might be onto something concerning Mecca. Compare the following passages from Isaiah 34, Jeremiah 49, and Revelation 18. Both Isaiah and Jeremiah concern Edom, from Dedan to Teman, and Bozrah. Thats pretty much most of Saudi Arabia.


Revelation 18:
2And he cried out with a mighty voice, saying, “Fallen, fallen is Babylon the great! She has become a dwelling place of demons and a prison of every unclean spirit, and a prison of every unclean and hateful bird.
Isaiah 34:
11But pelican and hedgehog will possess it,
And owl and raven will dwell in it;
And He will stretch over it the line of desolation
And the plumb line of emptiness.

Revelation 18:
17And every shipmaster and every passenger and sailor, and as many as make their living by the sea, stood at a distance, 18and were crying out as they saw the smoke of her burning, saying, ‘What city is like the great city?’

Jeremiah 49:
21The earth has quaked at the noise of their downfall. There is an outcry! The noise of it has been heard at the Red Sea.

Revelation 18:
18and were crying out as they saw the smoke of her burning, saying, ‘What city is like the great city?’

Isaiah 34:
9Its streams will be turned to pitch,
And its loose earth into brimstone,
And its land will become burning pitch.

Mecca sits on 7 hills in the desert and on the coast. Its a port city and trades in gold, spices, clothing, jewellery, and slaves. Saudi Arabia sits on oil, and Isaiah describes the grown becoming burning tar.

I think Shoebat might be right. It certainly fits well.

brainout | 16 Dec 2015, 04:04

Can't see Makka from the sea; there was no Makka until after 400 AD or so. The people who took down the 2nd Temple were not Arabs. So Daniel 9:27 says the SAME people, so can't be the Arabs. Daniel 10ff defines the Arabs as King of the South and focuses on Egypt, not Saudi; not, seven hills there. ROME is the focus.

Now, if you want to talk about WHO CONTROLS Rome, maybe: but it can't be the Arabs, as they already are identified with the King of the South.

Anonynomenon | 16 Dec 2015, 04:24

Well, Mystery Babylon doesn't necessarily have to be a part of Rome. So there can be Rome to the North and Mecca to the South. That would explain the constant back and forth between the north and south in Daniel 11.

And I really don't think the 7 hills are literal, it seems that they are used to represent the 7 kings of the Beast nations, so they're historical peaks of power.

brainout | 16 Dec 2015, 05:21

Okay, well let's just agree to disagree. I'll wait until after you get through Rev 17 classes.

Anonynomenon | 16 Dec 2015, 05:59

Well Rev 17 is a long ways away, but I understand. I only question the Roman theory because I expect the answer to be somewhere in the OT. No mention of 7 hills in OT that I know of; and the only other similarity to Rev 17-18 are Isa 47, Zeph 2, and the Edom prophecies referenced above.

brainout | 16 Dec 2015, 11:03

Well, the seven hills is the Romans' own nickname for Rome. Remember that the OT's last book was Malachi, which came out in 397 BC or so, long before there WAS a Rome. So it wouldn't have yet been known by that name, and wouldn't have necessarily become known by that name. Just as, Gehenna was a trash dump outside Jerusalem Christ often used as a synonym for hell; but you don't find it in the OT either.

Anonynomenon | 16 Dec 2015, 18:45

Ok. If you're still open to the conversation, I've ruled out Mecca. Now I'm trying to see how Istanbul could fit if Asia Minor where to be Revive as Rome. As Thieme mentioned, Lydia seems to be the origins of what would eventually become Rome, but I can't really find much on that part of history. That same area was once ruled by Gyges, who the Assyrians knew as Gugu.

So if Mystery Babylon were Istanbul (situated on the Golden Horn), then it would literally ride Asia Minor. I think its a possibility, since the Seven Churches were all in Asia Minor too.

The question is, does the land of Magog has any connection to Gyges.

brainout | 16 Dec 2015, 20:09

Yeah, well that's where your 8 has a kind of fit, as Istanbul=Constantinople=New Rome (the name Constantine gave it), because the seven hills were LITERALLY RECREATED there.

I don't remember where I put the Cambridge History volume on that fact, somewhere in my Ephesians1REPARSED. When I find it, will edit this comment with the source link.

Again, all my posts aren't meant to shut down anything you're saying. If anything, I make remarks to keep the convo going.

Anonynomenon | 16 Dec 2015, 20:21

Don't worry, I encourage you to challenge whatever you feel should be challenged. I looked closer at Isaiah 34 and realized that there simply isn't any way for Mecca to fulfill Mystery Babylon.

At this point, I'm trying to determine if Gyges of Lydia can be linked to Magog. Seems like scholars are divided on the issue.

brainout | 16 Dec 2015, 21:31

Found the Cambridge link, here: The Cambridge Ancient History: Volume 12, The Crisis of Empire, AD 193-337 (page 252)

I made a new post since you answered my other one. The cheapest version of that volume is over $100 in Amazon or Ebay. 😺

Here's another confirmation also from Cambridge, but in its history of Judaism, The Cambridge History of Judaism, Volume 2; Volume 4 (page 1035)

Sadly both editions no longer allow the extensive previews they used to allow. You used to be able to read whole chapters, five years ago when I first found those links.

Anonynomenon | 17 Dec 2015, 21:32

Now Turkey is trying to get closer to Israel.

Israel and Turkey on verge of dramatic revival of ties

Give what Erdogan said in his speech in the beginning of this thread, I would say Israel would be foolish to even consider getting close with Turkey.

Anonynomenon | 17 Dec 2015, 21:54

I've also been thinking about the Iron Legs (Western and Eastern Rome), and the Feet wixed with Iron and Clay. Feet have 10 toes, so maybe those are the 10 horns. I would expect the identity of those horns to be found in OT somewhere (we know three of them will be uprooted).

So, if Eastern Rome is revived, then it would be mixed with strong and weak nations that will not cleave. The Arab nations would fit that deacription. They're very factionalized, and oppressed by dictatorships. So I guess homeland Rome would be the Iron and the annexed Arabs would be the clay.

brainout | 18 Dec 2015, 02:07

Arabs are King of the South. So that leaves other Western nations.

Anonynomenon | 21 Dec 2015, 20:59


There are two legs of Rome, and therefore one foot for each leg. What if both Western and Eastern Rome are revived together? So like you said, the 10 Horns would consist of parts of Europe and Turkey.

brainout | 22 Dec 2015, 17:46

Well, two feet, so yeah that could be.

Anonynomenon | 21 Mar 2016, 02:09

It looks like the EU's poor decision making on the immigrant crisis has backed it into a corner. EU wants Turkey to take some of the immigrants, but in return, Turkey wants to try joining the EU. Turkey has been trying this for years, but now the EU has put itself into a bad position.

George Osborne: Turkey EU membership 'not on the cards'

Its groundhog's day again.

brainout | 22 Mar 2016, 05:08

Yeppers. So now Turkey's citizens need to decide whether they really want the anti-Israel Erdogan, or not.

Anonynomenon | 23 Mar 2016, 04:35

So far this EU-Turkey deal is following the same pattern as the Iranian Nuclear deal.

Jan 19th--Announcing a 'frame-work' meeting.
March 4/5 (account for leap day)-- framework meeting is held.
April 3-- Deal is signed. It would be interesting if Turkey gets closer to joining the EU by this date.

RonEzboulder | 16 Apr 2016, 21:09

Rome?! Are you serious! "The seven heads are seven mountains, on which the woman sitteth" (Rev.17:9, KJV). Have you concidered how WIDE her bottom would have to be!

brainout | 17 Apr 2016, 01:05


Or something else...

brainout | 26 Apr 2016, 06:11

Right Scoop just did an analysis of Bible prophecy using Walid Shoebat's model of Erdogan, here (PROPHECY PRIMER: Let’s talk about the Antichrist and Bible Prophecy).

My reply is pasted here, in case Right Scoop deletes it,

brain out | 8 years ago

Sorry, you're flat wrong on the Roman Empire not being referenced. The 'prince' who took down the Temple, Daniel 9:26, is the SAME as the one who will be in Rev 13. Furthermore, it's the main prophecy of the NT, which I've been documenting IN THE GREEK for 8 years. POLITICAL CHRISTIANITY is the harlot, and that's what Rev17 means by 'mystery' (Paul's keyword for Church).

GREEK METERS A TIMELINE as did the Hebrew, which again I've been documenting for 8 years, when I first found it in Isaiah 53. Done hundreds of videos showing live in Scripture how the meter works, Right now, we're metering Matthew 24-25 (which is one chapter of an annual prophetic timeline excoriating CHURCH for politicizing), latest results here: frankforum/viewtopic.php?f=16&t=512&p=2321#p2304

If you look at the links there, the trail of prophetically condemning Political Church begins at Matt 24:5 (add 30 to the syllable counts to convert to AD), which of course is when Irenaeus and Tertullian were telling their lies.

Paul extensively also documented the upcoming apostasy syllable by year, with astonishing satire, MATCHING HIS TEXT TO MATT24, which we've just found. The Pauline writeup and videos (with downloadable pdf/docs/htm so you can vet the material in Bible and history yourself) is covered in Dare you to disprove it.

Now, none of that disproves the POTENTIAL of a Turkiye Erdogan or other guy trying to do its thing. Shoebat isn't paying enough attention to the Greek, though. He doesn't know the meter, as indeed none of the scholars do, since they still think 'meter' can only mean poetry. Never mind, folks remembered Scripture by SYLLABLE COUNTS, which clearly Paul and Luke MAP to sync with Matt24-25. So Shoebat's and your analysis suffer because you don't know these things.

So then how could both be true? Easy: 'ChrisLam'. Roman model in that Rome was all about the unity of church and state, and so too of course ISlam, and so too the Bible warning against political Christianity, of which Ted Cruz and Donald Trump are the #GOP poster boys (backed by Dominionists, aka 'evangelicals', who want Caesar, not God). LOL the sect to which Ted Cruz belongs, is called SEVEN MOUNTAINS, could God make the warning more obvious?

I know you're for Cruz, and I would be also, were he not Dominionist.

All to destroy Israel, of course. Which is, Erdogan's biggest wish. Dominionism is anti-Israel, look it up along with Replacement Theology and Reconstructionism. Constantine started that. And Constantine is burlesqued by the Lord directly in Matt 24:8-9 (by the end, 354 AD, Constantine's surviving sons were killing each others kingdoms over whether God was One or Three). Paul is even more pointed about it, starting here: GGS11u1a Paul meter-maps Constantine in Eph1:11-12 (b-out GGS God Meters Time, Epi.10-11).

So to instead just focus on Islam when Bible instead blames Church, is to misrepresent Bible prophecy.

Important ADDENDUM you'll like: there is a running connection in the NT on what seems to be a LINK between three historical trends:

  • Fall of interest in Bible
  • Rescue of that Bible to another geographical area
  • swarms of Islam

I've been tracing it for years, but newly in the Matt24-25 meter there may be yet another deliberate connecting.

The early stuff got charted in a worksheet, GeneYrs.xls and in my Youtube video series 'How Satan Deploys Islam', which are just historical uses of that worksheet, to show the connection.

But in the Matt24-25 Greek meter which we're still parsing, the NT rhetorical device of using 'anaphora' to highlight certain (then-future) historical periods centers on what looks like how Islam is used by GOD to free up Bible when it gets trapped by Catholicism.

One period runs from 1066-1080 AD (parable of the fig tree), another from 1140-2036 AD, another between 1140-1570 (beginning of the Protestant Reformation in England). Each of these were also periods of significant Muslim invasion of the West and Jerusalem proper (i.e., 1073, 1453, 1517).

So there is a link: Christian apostasy grows due to increase of religiosity and decrease of interest in Bible, hence the Leviticus 26 principle of Christians being overrun -- but here, PLOTTED into 'epochs' in a kind of parable fashion to tell the 'theme' of the epoch.

So yeah, Rev 17 is indeed Fake Church ROMAN STYLE (attempt to unify Church and State, started by Constantine; 'mystery' is the term for Church, doctrine known within a group but a mystery to those outside it) -- but there is a connection with Islam as well. Not merely one OR the other. Which I knew, but only now is it clear the METER references it.

Our time is the second 'Lord' in Matt 25:11. Door got shut in 1998, but 'door' doesn't mean Rapture, but Judgment. What kind, varies with whatever apostasy is rampant.

Bottom line is, that explains why the Muslims are so much a problem today. WE ARE APOSTATE.

2Chron7:14 is the only remedy.

It's a new dawn, a new day! | 8 years ago


You lost me when you started in on the "Cruz is a dominionist." Especially when you say that dominionism is anti-Israel. Cruz isn't anti-Israel; just ask the Israelis.

Are you aware that dominionism is a term coined by a leftist? And only leftists use it, to discredit anyone who's a believer. Because even honest leftists will tell you the term is applied to every conservative Christian.

brain out | 8 years ago edited

You should do your homework on what I posted. When you actually read the material, then you'll understand. I did also just post a video to explain the Constantine reference CHRIST makes in Matt24, here:

Didn't want to just post here in Right Scoop (which I love), without providing BIBLE BACKUP in addition to the YEARS of research and Bible backup I've long been doing.

Links show it all, and you can't read it as a soundbyte. Will take you over a year to vet. Took me years to write up, and discussion is still ongoing on this topic in Frankforum, link provided above.

And the proof of Cruz being Dominionist was already provided in my prior post, in his dad's own words, in Youtube.

It's a new dawn, a new day! | 8 years ago

I honestly couldn't care less about your videos or your homework, because I've done mine. I said what I meant to say; every time some Trumpster or leftist cries about Cruz's "dominionism," what they're really saying is, "I don't like him because he's a conservative Christian."

brain out | 8 years ago

I'm not a Trumpster or a leftist, and the DOMINIONISM, is from Rafael Cruz' own mouth, not some Trumpster or leftist. Which you would have known, if you did your homework on the links provided.

So you prove as low information and despicable, as a Trumpster or leftist, in that you fly off with your ASSumptions, spit on Scripture provided too, all to lambast someone making provable constructive criticism of your false messiah.

Here, that is not Ted Cruz' fault. It is yours. But supporters always reflect the leader they support. Not good.

It's a new dawn, a new day! | 8 years ago

Here's what I know about Cruz: he's a constitutional conservative and supports religious liberty.

That doesn't mean he wants Christians to take over the world.

Even if he did, he and his "dominionist" friends (that's granting your ASSertion, for the moment) would have a row that's far bigger to hoe than he could manage during eight years as president, since the "dominionists" don't currently even control their own "mountain" of religion. Take a look at most Christian sects these days: you'll see them overrun with leftism.

There's no way they'll take control of all the other mountains of power in eight years.

So see? I know what you're talking about. I simply believe it's bunk and hokum.

brain out | 8 years ago

I hope you're right. They back DT, those vile Dominionists, so we'll see.

No, you don't know. But I do not wish to argue. God might, but that's between Him and you.

It's a new dawn, a new day! | 8 years ago

You're not winning me over.

brain out | 8 years ago

Not trying to win you over. Maybe you feel the need to get others to agree, but I do not. Due Diligence Disclosure is my sole goal.

The Right Scoop MODERATOR | 8 years ago

This is what I expected.

I'm just going to mention it's the 'people of the prince' in Dan 9, not the prince.

Also you dare me to disprove, and you do nothing to disprove what I've written.

So I'll move along now.

brain out | 8 years ago

Well, the dare requires you actually study the GREEK TEXT of Scripture, since I spent five whopping years showing it, starting in 2010. You also didn't notice that the TEXT says CHURCH is to blame, not wholly excluding what you claim here, which I also said.

In short, your analysis is off because you don't include BIBLE on the rise of Apostate Church, which is a primary theme in NT, which the scholars have long taught, but they didn't know the meter confirmed it. Now they and you, can.

Now, since it alters your claims you might feel offended. That is not the intent. The intent, is to get at what BIBLE stresses. Which, doesn't wholly invalidate what you claim here, but it is a correction. Make of it what you will. I'm not trying to argue with you, but to offer refinements which you might find actually better buttresses, your positions.

Anonynomenon | 26 Apr 2016, 19:59

Lol. Wow, I went to Rightscoop to read the conversation you had. Those people really didn't like you crashing their party. Especially with the Cruz comments. Its amazing how antagonistic other believers are to outside perspectives.

You would think people would want to know about something as intricate as the Meter. Apparently it's out of their comfort zone.

brainout | 26 Apr 2016, 20:15

Well, maybe they ASSumed I was trying to trash Cruz. I'm not. I think he's got the potential to be a great President, but not yet. He's too stuck on his dad's Dominionism, which I was trying to explain.

As to the meter and its SUBTLE tie to Istanbul due to its Constantinian history, well.. this is news to them, and for the moment they are reacting. Once they see this thread and your comments, plus some others of mine, they will maybe realize their positions need CORRECTION, which can actually help them.

Anonynomenon | 26 Apr 2016, 22:34

I guess I really shouldn't be too critical. I know how difficult it can be maintain objectivity when faced with new information that contradicts personal opinion. I still struggle with it myself.

BTW, have you seen the new trend in Europe? Certain members of the EU want to push for a European Federal Union.

FEDERAL EUROPE PLOT: EU draws up plans for United States of Europe behind Britain’s back

A declaration for the movement was signed in Rome in September of 2015, but its just now reaching the public eye, just as the UK is considering withdrawal from the EU.

On top of that, Turkey is already threatening to go back on the immigrant deal if the EU doesn't expedite the accession process.

Just as USA is going through a political power struggle, it appears more so in Europe.

Do you think that ties to 'Kurie, Kurie...' in Matt 25?

brainout | 26 Apr 2016, 23:09

Oh, sure., it could. I no longer think the timeline is US-centric, though obviously we are part of it. Everyone's angling for a SAVIOR and picking some GOVERNMENT SOLUTION to get it. Anything but the Real LORD.

Anonynomenon | 29 Apr 2016, 18:23

Here is a much more detailed article covering more of Europe's attempt for passive united federalist consolidation of power.

European Ministers Lay Out Explicit Plan to Create United States of Europe

Four nations have signed a joint declaration in Rome:

  1. Germany
  2. Italy
  3. France
  4. Luxembourg

Three Nations are presently experiencing a consolidation of military forces under Germany:

  1. Denmark
  2. Czech Republic
  3. Netherlands

So far, Britain might be leaving the EU, but might be pressured to stay.

Turkey is become much more aggressive in its entry tactics.

So far that is at least 7 nations that might become involved in forming a European Federal Union.

I want to know how the end-times droolers are missing this? This is a legit historical trend here...comparable to Justinian's Rome.

brainout | 29 Apr 2016, 19:54

Good points!
(Yeehah, only 11 plans left, and those I can do blindfolded! God made it VERY easy, so can spend more time on the meter!)

Anonynomenon | 29 Apr 2016, 20:37

Yeah. I'm have an idea for finding the right elisions. Im going to see if there is a consistent/predictable rhythm to the text that might make the elisions stick out. Like a musical time signature: so many beats per measure.

brainout | 29 Apr 2016, 22:08

Okay. Would be interesting!

At my end, I think He's playing a game with the Varronic 4-year error (same as and source of our 4BC Christ Birth error). Haunts me even in my sleep. But first, to finish the stupid other docs...

brainout | 08 May 2016, 04:18

Just had a thought re Rev17. The seven are those before and including, Daniel's Man of Time. So maybe:

Egypt, then Hittites, then Assyria, then Babylon, Persia, Greece, Rome =7 . But the 7th is yet to come, so scratch Egypt. Notice: all but Egypt attacked or were at times in history, antagonistic to her. Egypt was only antagonistic at the Exodus. After that, it didn't attack her, though it wanted to, I'm sure.

Pretty much all combos since are on the Roman model, so the 8th is part of the 7th. You can well argue that Islam is an outgrowth too, for Koran is very much patterned on Roman Catholicism ideas re Bible, rather than on Bible itself.

For 'kings' can stand for kingdoms.

Anonynomenon | 08 May 2016, 05:49

I would think that 7 specific kings would represent their kingdom. Has a particular Hittite king ever had any Beast quality?

I included Babel, since Babel's fall resulted in the division of the world into nations. That is the whole reason God called out Israel from the world for His own representation.

brainout | 08 May 2016, 06:16

Why would it have to be a specific king? I know some theological interps go like that, but in the context, and elsewhere in Bible, the ROLE of a king is more in view, viz., 'kings of the earth' isn't specific.

As for Babel, it predates Israel. I'm just thinking out loud given the text, not saying your ideas are wrong and mine right.

The only thing I'm absolutely sure of, it that it's FAKE/POLITICAL CHURCH on the Roman model and maybe geographically-related to Rome too: mystery=church, seven hills=old or new Rome (maybe Istanbul, so Islam is a follow-on), and it must be related to the same polity which took down the 2nd Temple, Daniel 9:27. But 'related' can be a form of government, not necessarily a Revived Roman Empire in the classical theological sense. For all forms of government today are on the Roman model (plebe house and Senate, some head over both, separate judicial system, some loose or strict tie to religion).

Anonynomenon | 08 May 2016, 19:22

I know that Babel predates Israel, but Babel's fall was the reason that God chose to represent Himself through Israel, so in that respect, it could be related.

Babel was also the First Eccumenical World Order, and Revived Rome is supposed to be the Final Eccumenical World Order.

Revelation 17:8 specifies that the Beast which John saw riding the Harlot came up out of the Abyss. In all of Revelation, the only Beast that I know of which rises from the Abyss is Apollyon. That tells me that Apollyon is the Beast which, "was, and is not, and is about to come out of the abyss and go to destruction". So in my opinion base on what Revelation states, the king of the eighth head is a specific king identified as Apollyon. Therefore it would make sense that each of the other heads have to be specific kings too.

So this is what I think might be the case.

  1. Babel: Nimrod (Micah 5 Land of Nimrod)
  2. Assyria: Sennacherib (Micah 5:5, Nahum 1, Zeph 2)
  3. Babylon: Nebuchadnezzar (Jer 50, Isa 47)
  4. Medo-Persia: Ahasuerus (Esther; had he listened to Haman he would have been a Beast)
  5. Seleucid Empire: Antiochus Epiphanes (Daniel 11)
  6. Rome: Domitian (Rev 17:10 "one is")
    • Rapture Happens Eventually
  7. Interim Union of Europe and Turkey that will become Rome???
  8. Revived Rome (both Legs): Apollyon (Rev 17:8)

From my observations, it seems that there will both be a Revived King and a Revived Kingdom.

The Revived Kingdom is Rome, which is the Kingdom of the 6th Head.

The Revived King, I believe could be Nimrod. That will require a lot of explanation, much of which will deviate from the Colonel's interpretations.

Regardless of how wrong I might be, I think there are a few key points to pin down.

  1. The 6th Head can not be Greek since Rev 17:10 makes it clear that the 6th Head existed in John's day.
  2. Therefore, the 7th Head must be a future king/kingdom that has a very short reign during the Tribulation (all future prophecy must occur after the Rapture, never before).

Can you offer an alternate explanation for those two points?

brainout | 09 May 2016, 00:21

Well, as I said, it depends on how you want to read the 8. I could also claim that the sixth is Domitian, and count back to Caligula (Domitian='now is', then Titus, Vespasian, Nero, Claudius, Caligula). In which case, none of the past empires are in view.

I'm not sure how the 'kings' should be counted. I'm only sure that the end one, is POLITICAL FAKE CHURCH on the Roman model (which all Protties and RCC, Greek Odox etc all are).

Anonynomenon | 09 May 2016, 01:51

Well if the Beast has 7 Heads (either 7 Roman emperors or 7 historical empires), the the Harlot would be riding all 7 of them, not just the 8th.

So the Harlot is definitely a religio-political system, but more of a parasitic one that attempts to integrate itself with Biblical faith.

So if the Heads are Roman Emporers, then how did the Harlot control them.

If the Heads are 7 Historical kingdoms, then the Harlot is some adoption of the original Baal Cult.

Islam is an adoption of Baal worship that is designed to integrate with apostate Christianity and Judaism.

brainout | 09 May 2016, 02:20

No, the text only says she's riding the last one, but it's the PRODUCT of the prior, so to call them past kings (which the text does) or empires (since kings rule polities) is still valid.

And all those past kings or empires, sponsored state religion. Scarlet/purple = religion/political rule. The 'harlot' always means religion in Bible, since at first the religions were orgiastic.

So then the harlot comes to exist, first under the yet-to-come versus 88/9AD, Domitian: Constantine. Remains a trend ever after. Which, since Constantinople is now Istanbul, might include Islam, Chrislam, etc.

Anonynomenon | 09 May 2016, 02:40


Rev 17:3 And he carried me away in the Spirit into a wilderness; and I saw a woman sitting on a scarlet beast, full of blasphemous names, having seven heads and ten horns.

The Harlot rides only one Beast which has 7 Heads. So the Harlot would have control over ALL the Heads, not just one.

So we need to define the Scarlet Beast with 7 Heads.


Rev 12: 3Then another sign appeared in heaven: and behold, a great red dragon having seven heads and ten horns, and on his heads were seven diadems. 4And his tail swept away a third of the stars of heaven and threw them to the earth. And the dragon stood before the woman who was about to give birth, so that when she gave birth he might devour her child.

Looks like Satan is the Beast with 7 Heads. It is his system of government which is kept under control by Religion.

That doesn't rule out the 7 Roman Emperor theory, but we have to show how the Harlot controlled all of them.

brainout | 09 May 2016, 02:54

Yes, but any polity even today, is the product of ones past.

Anonynomenon | 09 May 2016, 03:21

Yes, that is true.

Anyways, now I'm just confused. The Harlot rides a Beast with 7 Heads, so that implies that the religion controls all 7 Heads. Yet, the Scarlet Beast, "was, but is not, but will rise from the Abyss" (Rev 17:8), so could the 6th Head be the one that "is", when the entire Beast "is not"(Rev 17:10).

So maybe the Harlot only controls the 8th Head as you said, but I don't how to reconcile the above statement.

brainout | 09 May 2016, 03:39

Well, let's think that over:

If you take the 'empires' position for the past kings, then in each case -- religion CONTROLLED them, or they USED religion to gain/consolidate/keep control. So no contradiction.

If you take the 'kings' position, whether only SPQR kings or others in the past, it's still the same no-contradiction.

Or if you just leave out the past, the future polity will use religion to gain/consolidate/keep political control, that's why they hate the harlot.

Does this reply help?

Anonynomenon | 09 May 2016, 03:57


I can see how religion has influenced polity throughout history. I just need to re-think the 7-kings/kingdoms vs the 7 Roman Emperors interpretations. I don't really know where to start right now.

brainout | 09 May 2016, 04:00

Yeah, me neither. I was just asking God about that, and the answer 'BOTH' hit me.
But that might have been my dinner, not Him.

Anonynomenon | 09 May 2016, 04:08

How about this for a starting point?

Rev 12:3 calls Satan the 7-Headed Beast,but in Rev 13:1 is what we understand the 7-Headed Beast to be the Anti-Christ. So why two 7-Headed Beasts? Is it a father-son relationship? Like Anti-Trinity (which it prevalent in the ancient cults)?

brainout | 09 May 2016, 04:10

Well, that just means Satan is behind the Rev17 beast. You could well argue (and Bible does) that ALL the kingdoms/empires are backed by Satan. Remember 3rd Temptation in Matt4?

Anonynomenon | 09 May 2016, 04:18

ok, but what does it mean that the Beast rises from the Abyss. That is why I tie it to Apollyon, but could it mean something else?

brainout | 09 May 2016, 04:32

Well, the TAKEOVER might begin at mid-Trib.

Anonynomenon | 09 May 2016, 04:37

But that would imply that Apollyon is the Anti-Christ, and that his "beer hall putsch" is the Abomination of Desolation. Right?

brainout | 09 May 2016, 04:45

Well, I think Apollyon is in Tartarus, heading up the demons there. Not, Satan. So mebbe (just guessing, now) Satan at Trib start begins to influence/create the 'beast', but hampered by the Two Witnesses, he does the Rev 9 thing at start of 3rd year; it's successful, and at mid-point Apollyon kills the Two Witnesses and THEN full takeover begins. Hence statue flown in, etc.

Anonynomenon | 09 May 2016, 04:56

I used to hold a similar opinion, but compare Rev 9:11 with Rev 17:


Rev 9:11 ἔχουσιν ἐπ’ αὐτῶν βασιλέα τὸν ἄγγελον τῆς ἀβύσσου, ὄνομα αὐτῷ Ἑβραϊστί Ἀβαδδών καὶ ἐν τῇ Ἑλληνικῇ ὄνομα ἔχει Ἀπολλύων.

Rev 17:8 τὸ θηρίον ὃ εἶδες ἦν καὶ οὐκ ἔστιν, καὶ μέλλει ἀναβαίνειν ἐκ τῆς ἀβύσσου καὶ εἰς ἀπώλειαν ὑπάγει· καὶ θαυμασθήσονται οἱ κατοικοῦντες ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς, ὧν οὐ γέγραπται τὸ ὄνομα ἐπὶ τὸ βιβλίον τῆς ζωῆς ἀπὸ καταβολῆς κόσμου, βλεπόντων τὸ θηρίον ὅτι ἦν καὶ οὐκ ἔστιν καὶ παρέσται.

What if the 7th Head is in place for the first 3.5 years of the Trib, then Apollyon takes the tourch from the 7th Head at Mid-Trib, and becomes the 8th.

brainout | 09 May 2016, 05:01

Yeah, that's what I was trying to say. I think it's a causal connection. At Trib start, Satan first gets the world behind him, then Rev9 demands key to abussos (which may or may not include Tartarus, but I think it prolly does, since the Gen 6 fallen angels are there); then by Rev12 revolts in heaven cuz he thinks he won, and God's lying. Ergo last half.

Anonynomenon | 09 May 2016, 05:08

Ok, so if that is the case, then how is Apollyon the Beast that "was and is not"?


Rev 3:11“The beast which was and is not, is himself also an eighth and is one of the seven, and he goes to destruction."

That is where things get really confusing for me, because it implies:

  1. that the 7 Heads are 7 historical kings.
  2. that Apollyon was one of those ancient king.

If those two implications are wrong, then Abyss does not carry the same meaning between Rev 9 and Rev 17.

brainout | 09 May 2016, 05:11

Text never says APOLLYON is the Beast. Satan is the dragon, and is behind politics. 'Beast' means political entity, never a person. Satan rules the fallen angels, and Apollyon is one of them.

The trouble is whether Apollyon is a separate person, which I think he is, given he comes up OUT of abussos, in Rev 9:11. But even that might just mean Satan heads them, not himself coming up out of Abyss. For one of Satan's nicknames is Destroyer, Apollo, from apolumi.

Anonynomenon | 09 May 2016, 05:24

Ok, so the political power system rises from the abyss, which is headed by Apollyon (who could be Satan).

Does that mean that Apollyon is what we call the Anti-Christ? Also remember that the False Prophet is also called a Beast, so it seems that Beast can mean both individual and collective.

brainout | 09 May 2016, 05:34

Well, wait until you get to Rev9-13 in the tapes.

KoW=Daniel KoN. Then Daniel 11:35ff is the False Prophet (head of Israel at that point). That's why there can BE a statue in mid-Trib. Both are humans. It's key to the Conflict that HUMANS want the stuff Satan panders. So he's not enforcing over. He's influencing.

So power behind them, is satanic. Whether Satan directly indwelling KoN, maybe Apollyon (if separate) indwells False Prophet, maybe only influence. 2Thess 2 ties here. Thieme says the KoN will be Gentile, and indwelt. I don't remember where he gets the 'indwelt' conclusion.

Anonynomenon | 09 May 2016, 05:53

K. Thanks, I'll take a closer look at Dan 11.

Anonynomenon | 09 May 2016, 17:49


Is it possible that the Great Trib (aka Jacob's Trouble) didn't come from Jacob at all. After all, it is part of the time that the Gentiles trample Jerusalem.

Didn't the Flood happen 1655.5 years YoW?



What if the Great Tribulation is supposed to be Antediluvian time? The 119 years could be related to the 120 years in Gen 6, and Jesus likened His return to the days of Noah.

The reason I thought of that is because Apollyon and his angels are the only thing to rise from the Abyss, yet so does the "Beast". So is the "Beast" really the Antediluvian political system?

brainout | 09 May 2016, 23:27

That's a stretch. Moses wrote Genesis per his meter, start of 1051st year after Flood began. So there's 'some' 1050 measure to follow, but so far I can't find it. The 119 doesn't work for anything in the past that I know of, and why would Abyss be tied to that?

Anonynomenon | 10 May 2016, 01:00

Well, like I said, Apollyon and his angels rise from the Abyss, as does the Beast/political system...that is the same Beast, 'that was, is not, but will rise from the Abyss.'

If the angels in the Abyss were put there because of their Gen 6:4 activities. Then what if they were the Beast/political system that took control of the Antediluvian world?


Rev 17:8 “The beast that you saw was, and is not, and is about to come up out of the abyss and go to destruction"

Rev 17:11“The beast which was and is not, is himself also an eighth and is one of the seven, and he goes to destruction.

How else are we to interpret the Rev 17:8 & 11? What other pre-existing kingdom went into the Abyss only to Rise again???

I was going to leave the subject alone, but I asked God about it, and it the idea popped into my head as I was trying to fall asleep. Maybe I'm wrong, but I think it merits a closer look, at least.

brainout | 10 May 2016, 04:12

But we don't know why Abussos angels are there. Tartarus is for the Gen 6 group.

Anonynomenon | 11 May 2016, 06:42

Ok, so what if "abyss" is being used two different ways, both literally (as in the case of Apollyon and crew) and symbolically for Rome.

Since Rome died as a kingdom, would that be like saying 'Rome went into the Abyss'?
Similar to Isaiah 14:9


“Sheol from beneath is excited over you to meet you when you come; It arouses for you the spirits of the dead, all the leaders of the earth; It raises all the kings of the nations from their thrones.

brainout | 11 May 2016, 07:25

Sheol is for people, not kingdoms. A kingdom is just a collection of buildings, rules, goods.

brainout | 29 Jun 2016, 09:10

Useful timeline of WWI, just in case we're in for a repetition: Timeline of World War I: 1914

Anonynomenon | 15 Jul 2016, 23:13

An attempted coup going on in Turkey right now. There's a lot of conflicting info floating around. This has been a very active month.

Anonynomenon | 16 Jul 2016, 23:55

I'm under the impression that Erdogan staged this whole thing for his own political glory. Now he is purging his government, and he has the "justfication" for the strick "anti-terror" laws that have been standing between Turkey and EU accession. I've never seen such a sorry attempt at a coup before.

brainout | 18 Jul 2016, 03:30

Yeah, I'm thinking he didn't actually stage it but knew it was going to happen and 'prepared' as an excuse for a crackdown. Too easily put down, not to think as you posited or similarly.

Anonynomenon | 03 Aug 2016, 20:26

OMG. Why is Europe still committed to this Turkish deal? After the post-coup crackdown and Erdogan's incessant threats, why are they so eager to let a facist nation into their Union. Its insanity.

EU Says Committed to Making Europe-Turkey Refugee Agreement Work

Erdogan has set an ultimatum: Accession by October or deal is off. The EU needs to tell Erdogan to go to hell, and handle the immigrants themselves.

There must be something more to this than the immigration deal. It just doesnt make sense.

brainout | 17 Aug 2016, 10:59

Well, now that Russia is using Iran to fly to Syria rather than making some arrangement with Turkiye, that might explain something of the ultimatum. But we'll see. I just learned of thre Russian flying within the last 24 hours.

Interesting papers on Millennialism under Boston U.

brainout | 30 Mar 2017, 06:04

Articles and Abstracts | Copyright ©1998 by Center for Millennial Studies - ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

That link cannot be accessed from the home page, which omits the 'scholarship' directory in its links. The papers are old, focused on the first and second 1000's, but are very insightful.

brainout | 31 Mar 2017, 23:11

To me, these newly-found old papers are my smoking gun, for I've long stated (based on conjecture, k) that the Bible's own 490-year and 1000-year TIME LOAN deadlines are PSYCHOLOGICAL, to keep the human race free of too much religiosity. The papers don't wholly confirm but the awareness that there are such trends, and that they are psychological (i.e., they don't claim the phenomena is predicted in Bible, nor that religion is to blame). Sadly, they don't investigate what the Bible actually SAYS, but go on hearsay; so they lump Bible's apocalyptic passages with the goofball stuff that's pandered when these 'end times' movements rise. So the authors of these papers do not know how specific-to-years and aptly prophetical, passages like Matt24-25, Eph1, Luke 21, Mark 13 and Rev17, are. Thus is the difference between Scripture and the movements, manifest.


The papers, written by different authors, all argue that millenniarianism should be taken seriously; not that its tenets are necessarily true, but that the behaviors and beliefs cause massive changes in society and history, both for ill and good. They all argue that dismissing the belief systems as bogus makes for bad historical diagnosis.

This argument can be historically tested, and would have a prognosticating function as well. I tried to map it in 2004, long before I discovered the papers: GeneYrs.xls.

So now let's tie the papers, to Bible's rules on Time: believers-calling-end-times trends post-Cross, would have apex periods. So they can be traced historically, and predicted.

The Bible 'qualifying' rules are: every 490 and 1000 years is an 'end'; someone must spiritually mature enough to justify Time's continuance; backstop for these deadlines, is the from-Adam 490 and 1050s which got reset at the Cross.

In short, TIME ENDS if someone doesn't mature by the qualifying deadlines, no matter where in history, that deadline occurs. Ends up meaning the LAST PERSON who meets the deadline, prolongs history, even if the historical 490+70+490 is due to end.

Rapture doctrine post-Cross, is merely an update, with a new twist: if Church corporate doesn't complete (since He paid for every member of Church in advance on the Cross), then TIME ENDS. You can see why Satan would win, for it would be a mistrial to claim evidence of souls paid, if those souls never come to exist or believe or mature as forepaid by Christ.

The 490 QUALIFYING 'ends', as years post-Christ Birth or Cross, would be:

The 1000 qualifier 'ends' would be:

Historical (490+70+490) ends would be:

So the EARLIEST of these 'ends' would begin the apex of mass movements claiming 'the end times are upon us', and would wave upwards, as the later deadlines draw near.


Thus 980-1050, 1470-1610, 1960-2100, 2450-2660, 2940-3150.

Apexes you should be able to observe in history thus should be: 490-590 AD, (using Varro, not Livy as Bible sometimes does, since Dionysus Exiguus used Varro).


Apexes take time to develop, so allow 30 years prior, for the 'start' of the 'end times' mindset to develop. Its manifestation won't be universal, but it will reflect target populations of rising interest in Bible (not correct doctrine or right motives, just interest).

Variantly, if the measure people use for these benchmarks is wrong, they will still exhibit the behavior; in 217-230 Rome, chiliasts tagged ab urbe condita instead of His Birth or Death, so thought the '1000' was imminent in their day (using errant Varro, 753 BC). The bilious 'church fathers' made up wacky start dates for creation, so using their start dates, for example, folks thought 801 AD began the 6000th year of Creation (which also isn't tied to the errant Seder Olam Rabbah). Then there was the panic, abetted by the popularity of the friars carrying Paris Bibles (first time Bible was small and easily used).. people thought based on MISREADING Daniel 12, that the world would end in 1260 AD.

Then there are the wackos whose other counts make no sense at all, like that guy who wrote '88 reasons why the Rapture will occur in '88' or dingdong Harold Camping. But they had many followers. Even so, if these movements occur within the time periods above, they would overlap, within.

So per Bible, this is year 6123 from Adam's Fall, using Rosh HaShanah fiscal or sacred year fiscal, since the Vernal Equinox just occurred. Real Easter aka Firstfruits, will be April 7th (18th day after vernal equinox), but the Jews think it's 5777, and get Passover wrong; RCC's goofball 'Easter computus' (no matter how well Mosshammer explains it), will also misdate. Can't even get the Lord's death day right.

So imagine the Jews claiming year 6000 in 223 years, so a flurry of 'end times' will be starting in about 100 years, by them. All the while, ignoring BIBLE. Of course, many Jews know this error, that the 346 years Israel was under Persia etc. is cut out of the Seder Olam Rabbah, so as in Christianity there are many Jews who are not so nutty. THEY know the calendar is solar not lunar; we only differ as to whether the 'sheni' is Adar or Elul (Elul, I contend; longer playlist is here).

In short, these apexes can either be based on false calculations, or represent a true psychological sense of 'the end' on the schedule Bible predicts.

I still cannot find any ancient text or treatise which recognizes the Bible meter's Time significance; except, perhaps, Sanhedrin 97-99 (but I didn't test it to see if its own text is metered as Bible). As was shown in the video survey, the existence of Bible meter was rediscovered during the Reformation (videos on that begin here); but that Bible meter is used for TIME at one syllable per year (hence Sepher Torah to count the syllables, which were often designated per letter).. they don't know.

Another big takeway from these trends, is the sad fact that people only find relevance in being saved from the lives they have. So unless death or the end of the world convincingly looms, they won't be interested. Well, unless their self-righteousness can be cultivated, as every inventor of religion, knows...

I wish there was a way to help these scholars know that Bible meter is eschatological and millennial by design, from Genesis through Revelation, which would help prove their case. All the datelines employ an equidistant formula keyed to the expected pre-Church Mill date, even in the NT, and the prophetical passages like Matt24/Eph1/Luke21/Matt13 while TRACING ANNUALLY THE FUTURE also serve to underscore the doctrine that Rapture can occur at any moment.

Oh well.

brainout | 11 Apr 2017, 05:43

Related paper from someone else is faster to read up on the myth of the Last Emperor, which was also popular with Carolingians/Ottonians, and helps one understand why Revelation 17 ends tagging the two Theophanus of both empires, Byz and West.

Genesis and Function of the Last Emperor Myth in Byzantine Eschatology: Petre Guran

The author didn't know Bible text is metered, didn't notice its anaphora, so can't tell how specific the Bible is on the doctrine from Genesis through Revelation, so debunks Scripture. Despite his disdain and consequent ineptitude, at least he furnishes the idea of the Last Emperor which started after Rome fell, etc. So worth reading, just the same. It's hard to find a treatise on this widely-held myth of the Dark/Middle Ages, so you take what you can get.

It's utterly ironic how he recounts the folks during each of the harlots RECOGNIZING that Rome could be the harlot for their time, but never remembering or even asking the question about Bible prophecy, but instead just opting for pseudo-Methodius which after all, is but reiterating the FOUR HARLOTS Rev17 depicts. So some demon had a hand in its composition.