Biblical Numbering Is NOT for Witchcraft

[Machtträger]

I wish I could hꜹe kept this post short since I would rather not waste much of anyone’s time on the topic of jewish literature, but the nature of the problem requires a deep dive, so enjoy.​

Magickal Bible Numbering​

The following are some of the statements made on our website about ‘numbers’ in the bible:
A. The Truth About "Biblical Prophesy"​

The Bible uses numbers because it is a book of witchcraft that is used by the enemy, not the 'Word of God.'​

B. The Joy of Satan Welcome Message ​

The Bible is NOT the word of "God" but was created and has been reinforced by human beings who have usurped ancient spiritual knowledge [that's why the Bible has numbers], and have used this knowledge to become as gods, themselves and to enslave humanity.​

C. The Holy Bible: A Book of Jewish Witchcraft​

Thus, when Jews at the highest levels work their witchcraft in groups, they use the numbers and verses in the Bible to accomplish their ends. From what I understand, some of the verses are vibrated in Hebrew in boustrophedon, meaning read in zigzag.​

I will have more information and many more examples on how the bible is nothing more than a book of Jewish witchcraft, hence the numbers; biblical numerology, and how the bible is continuously pushed upon the populace…​

This post targets the specific implication of “has/uses/hence the numbers”, which, (among other things) is not the numerical values contained by the bible like literally any other bꝏk, but rather its numerical division into chapters 🙵 verses, which are now used to qꭣte individual verses using a «Bꝏk chapter:verse» format, e.g., “Luke 3:15”.

I am specifically targeting the claim is that the ‘3:15’ 🙵 basically all other «chapter:verse» combinations actually hꜹe an occult significance (perhaps in relation to the verse itself), 🙵 (thus) were planned from the beginning by the writers of the bible to hꜹe specific occult meanings, both individually 🙵 collectively with the rest of the text (my best bet is as some sort of subconscious programming 🙵 manifestation tꝏl). Since there are given examples for the other claims relating to biblical numerology contained within the text itself, I am going to let those be.

I hꜹe gꝏd evidence suggesting this claim is completely baseless, 🙵 that the evidence actually suggests the current «chapter:verse» enumeration used by the entire gentile population was entirely coincidental—created by xians themselves over a millennia after xianity began—🙵 has no spiritual/occult significance whatsœver.​

Two Millennia of Clownery​

Let us start from the beginning. The “hebrew bible”, which contains the torah 🙵 the rest of the jewish literary trash, only ever had verse divisions from its inception. There are no records of actual chapter divisions in any of the bꝏks of the hebrew bible until the 14ᵗʰ century.¹ The jewish verse numbering only applies to the “old testament” text, which is only half of the bible. NO “new testament” on earth—the text specially crafted for gentiles, to constantly recite 🙵 memorize—had verse divisions until the 16ᵗʰ century.

From The Catholic Encyclopedia² (emphasis own): ​

With the arrangement into books, the labours of the earliest editors seem to have ended; they made no further division into sections or chapters. The text at first was a close succession of consonantal letters without vowel-signs or spacing or punctuation to guide the reader; but Jewish scholars through many centuries of painstaking care have provided a most perfect system of helps to the intelligent reading of the Hebrew Bible. Words were separated at an early date, perhaps before Christ. This was imperative, as the letters were frequently combined in different ways. The Septuagint translation bears witness not seldom to a combination different from the Massoretic. Verse divisions, too, were made by the early scribes, who found this necessary not only to aid the reading, but to guard against the intrusion of new verses. Uniformity did not obtain, however, as the Palestinian Jews, we are told, had shorter verses than the Babylonian. The present system is that of neither, but was partly a new arrangement elaborated by the Massoretes. The care taken is shown by the fact that every verse, in fact every letter, was counted by the scribes. Our chapter divisions were unknown to early Jewish scholars, who had their own divisions, according to sense, into the open and closed sections.​

There was no agreement from the very beginning on any fixed verse division, with a complete overhꜷl in the 10ᵗʰ century. It seems unplꜷsible that there was some “deeply magickal, genius, numerological master blueprint” in place which everyone seems to be implying (a specific example given at the end of this post).​

The Christian division into chapters, invented by Archbishop Stephen Langton about the beginning of the thirteenth century, has gained an entrance into the Hebrew Bible. The beginning was made by Rabbi Solomon ben Ismael who first (c. A D. 1330) placed the numerals of these chapters in the margin of the Hebrew text. In printed Bibles this system made its first appearance in the first two Bomberg editions of 1518. Arias Montanus, in his Antwerp Bible of 1571, "broke up the Hebrew text itself into chapters and introduced the Hebrew numerals into the body of the text itself" (Ginsburg). This, though contrary to the Massoretic directions, is still followed in nearly all printed Bibles on account of its great usefulness. In most instances (617 out of 779) the chapter coincides with one or other of the Massoretic sections. In Bomberg's great Bible of 1547-8, Hebrew numerals were affixed to every fifth verse. It was in the above mentioned Antwerp Bible that the Arabic numerals for all the verses were first placed against them in the margin, though this had been done on a more limited scale in the "Basle Psalter" of 1563.​

Yes, the jewish scribes adopted a chapter numbering system created by a gentile for their own torah becꜷse they deemed it superior to whatever they had.

Ironically, the only source that expouses the idea that the verse numbering is spiritually significant is the talmud itself, which, unsurprisingly, is where the massoretes encoded the idea that their numbering scheme was divine 🙵 should not be touched. Nedarim 37b.5³ states that the “cantillation notes” (which include the verse numberings) are “an integral part of torah study” 🙵 (in the next verse) that all of it was given directly to Moses in Sinai. However, we understand that the talmud is bullshit codified, so these statements can be assumed to hꜹe absolutely zero truth value, especially considering the comedically dubious origin story of the torah.

From Oxford Reference⁴ (emphasis own):​

The division of major sections of the OT (e.g. the Pentateuch) into Books was associated with the amount of material which would fit on to a single scroll. When the Hebrew was translated into Greek, which takes more space than Hebrew, some Books (e.g. Sam.) were divided into two. Conversely single items were collected into Books. Chapter divisions originated in Christian Bibles. Introduced for ease of reference, they followed various systems, e.g. that of the Eusebian canons. That in current use is attributed to Stephen Langton (d. 1228). Verse numbers were first used by Rabbi Nathan in his concordance of the Hebrew Bible in the mid-15th cent. These were used for the OT in the French (1553) and Latin (1555) Bibles printed by Robert Estienne (Stephanus). For the NT he used his own verse numbers in his 1551 edition. These have remained in use ever since. The Geneva Bible (1560) was the first English Bible to have numbered verses throughout.​

The xians had various chapter divisions since the beginning of xianity⁵, but Langton's version was what became the global standard.

It was Robert Estienne, a French gentile printer who created the current division of the new testament into verses.⁶ Estienne was a prolific figure in 16ᵗʰ century typography, hꜹing nicknames like ‘Printer to the King’ 🙵 ‘royal typographer’—he basically founded the Latin literary world during the early stages of print. It was for his printing of new Latin editions of the bible that he decided to come up with a new verse numbering system for the new testament, 🙵 simply used the existing old testament numbering from the jews (who had gotten it from Langton a couple centuries prior). The man was persecuted by the Church for being a protestant 🙵 making “problematic theological commentary” in his works, 🙵 was a refugee in Geneva for almost a decade before his death in 1559, which was where he printed his Latin bible editions.

To summarize this section into a couple of sentences⁷:​

A 14th-century rabbi, Solomon ben Ishmael, seems to have adapted Langton’s chapter divisions for use in Hebrew Bibles, complementing the existing verse divisions in the Masoretic Text. New Testament verse divisions seem to have been introduced by Robert Estienne in the 1550s.​

The Counterargument​

For the sake of argument, let us assume that the bible writer cabal (roman jews, massoretes, catholics, whœver) actually had planned the entire chapter 🙵 verse structure of the bible, either since the foundation of the jewish nation or during the pre-xian Roman era.

If the original jewish verse numbering (no chapters, just verses) was meant to be a subconscious magickal working, why would the jews allow the jewish literature in the hands of the gentiles to not contain this numbering for ≈15 centuries as they went 🙵 theologically conquered the entire Old World?

“They could hꜹe decided to introduce it after the invention of the printing press!” Okꜽ, then if they finally did decide to insert the magickal numbering after ≈15 centuries, why was—​

• it done by two different gentiles at different times 🙵 locations, both hꜹing a very low likelyhꝏd of collusion with jews​
• the chapter division different from both the ancient xian (which could hꜹe very well been of jewish origin) 🙵 ancient jewish divisions​
• that new chapter division adopted by the jews themselves for their own hebrew bible?​

Why would the jews adopt a chapter system created by a gentile into their own literature 🙵 combine it with their existing verse system if the numbering had a preplanned occult significance?

“Stephan Langton could hꜹe been a shabbos goy!” This would require that the man (a) was secretly a jew, or (b) collaborated with jews from inside the Catholic Church, who provided him with the magickal chapter numbering to claim as his own work. Both seem quite unreasonable. Langton was the key individual behind the Magna Carta of 1215, hꜹing been involved in various controversies with the both the Church 🙵 the English throne—at one point hꜹing been exiled from England itself—after which he spent the rest of his life trying to free it from papal control. Just read his biography 🙵 tell me if you think this man really could hꜹe had jewish connections.

What I am hoping for by making this thread is for someone to provide an explanation for how the current biblical «chapter:verse» numbering system could hꜹe been a premeditated jewish magickal working, or even better, to provide an actual example of this enumeration serving as witchcraft. I think that to believe this is to give tꝏ much credence to the absolute literary waste bin that is the bible—consider that believing this would also give validity to the “bible gematria” retards who perform a bunch of pseudo-math 🙵 bullshit “calculations” using verse numbers, word counts, 🙵 letter-value systems in order to “““prove””” that jewhovah is the OneTrueGod™; they even go so far to claim that reality itself is based on hebrew letters (the Jewtrix).

Now, let us take a lꝏk at an example of this belief at work. In this post, a member tries to show how English phrases related to the black race correspond with certain «chapter:verse» numberings in the bible. They state pretty much the same sources for the claim as I do (HPS Maxine's writings), 🙵 then go off the deep end (emphasis own):​

“Gematria is a numerological system by which Hebrew letters correspond to numbers. This system, developed by practitioners of Kabbalah (Jewish mysticism), derived from Greek influence and became a tool for interpreting biblical texts” (4)​

(That ‘4’ is a nonexistent reference by the wꜽ.) A few sentences later:

In English Gematria there are four main cyphers that are used.

…????????

They claim that “the «chapter:verse» summed describes who the verse curse is meant for” 🙵 then link English language terms to the numbering through gematria nonsense. How could jews in pissræl 2,000 years ago hꜹe known what English even was, let alone the modern spelling of these terms that this entire gematria system is critically reliant upon, 🙵 then decide that this language was the one they were going to write the bible verses and create their system for? How could they then hꜹe cꝏrdinated with some Catholic archbishop 1,300 years later to provide the critical chapter numbers necessary to calculate the spꝏky curse number through the arbitrary arithmetic operation of addition (why not subtraction or multiplication?)? How dœs a hebrew 🙵 Greek text written before England itself hꜹe anything to do with English? This sort of fantastical postulation is inane.

Like, I can create any letter-value system to make a certain group of words be equal in value, come up with some arbitrary calculation system to make external values alwꜽs result in the desired value, 🙵 then claim “this number is coded over this topic!”. Gematria is literally retards gawking at rehashed versions of the ‘Alwꜽs 4’ math trick from primary schꝏl. At least the xian bible gematria retards only conduct gematria shit with the biblical text in its original languages (ancient hebrew 🙵 Koine Greek).​

Conclusion​

The number of bꝏks in the bible, the number of chapters in a bꝏk, the number of verses in a bꝏk/chapter, etc. is utterly arbitrary 🙵 cannot be justified as some “seekret kabbalistic coding”, 🙵 any numerological claims based on them are invalid. There is simply tꝏ much historical volatility 🙵 spatio-temporal disconnect for these values to hꜹe been premeditated. By engaging in this sort of speculation, not only is one rejecting sound historical record, but they are walking down the path of turning the jews into a kind of deus ex machina—something Evola explicitly warned us against in his Preface to ‘The Protocols of the Elders of Zion’:​

Let us start by saying that we cannot support the sort of fanatical anti-Semitism which sees the Jew everywhere, as a deus ex machina, and finally falls into a sort of trap. In fact, as Guénon pointed out, one of the means of defence of the real concealed forces consists in drawing the whole of the attention of their adversaries tendentiously upon persons who are only partially responsible for certain upheavals, thus making them into scapegoats of a sort, on which all the reactions are discharged, and leaving themselves free to pursue their game. This is true, to some extent, in respect of the Jewish question. Merely noting the pernicious role that the Jew has played in the history of civilisation must not prejudice a deeper investigation, which can make us become aware of forces for which Judaism itself may have been, to some extent, only the instrument.​

I am afraid that in this case, the deeper investigation was not conducted, 🙵 I hꜹe had to provide rectification for a (type of) belief that, while seemingly harmless 🙵 valid on the surface, mꜽ lead one down very long lines of erroneous thought.

---

References​

[1]: G. F. Moore, “The Vulgate Chapters and Numbered Verses in the Hebrew Bible.” Journal of Biblical Literature 12, № 1 (1893): 73–78.

[2]: John Francis Fenlon, “Hebrew Bible,” in The Catholic Encyclopedia 7, (New York: Robert Appleton Company, 1910).
[3]: Nedarim 37b.5‒6,The William Davidson Talmud (Koren–Steinsaltz) 18 (2015).
[4]: “Bible divisions and references.” Oxford Reference. ; Accessed 14 Jul. 2024.
[5]: James Snapp, Jr., “Kephalaia: The Ancient Chapters of the Gospels,” The Text of the Gospels, April 15, 2016.
[6]: “The Printer's Device: Robert Estienne's Numbering of Verses and the Changing Form of the New Testament in the 15th and 16th Centuries,” Pitts Theology Library. ; Accessed 14 Jul. 2024.
[7]: Chris Heard, “Why are Biblical Chapters and Verses Numbered?” Bible Odyssey. ; Accessed 14 Jul. 2024.​

 

[Blitzkreig [JG]]

I wish I could hꜹe kept this post short since I would rather not waste much of anyone’s time on the topic of jewish literature, but the nature of the problem requires a deep dive, so enjoy.​

Magickal Bible Numbering​

The following are some of the statements made on our website about ‘numbers’ in the bible:
A. The Truth About "Biblical Prophesy"

B. The Joy of Satan Welcome Message

C. The Holy Bible: A Book of Jewish Witchcraft


This post targets the specific implication of “has/uses/hence the numbers”, which, (among other things) is not the numerical values contained by the bible like literally any other bꝏk, but rather its numerical division into chapters 🙵 verses, which are now used to qꭣte individual verses using a «Bꝏk chapter:verse» format, e.g., “Luke 3:15”.

I am specifically targeting the claim is that the ‘3:15’ 🙵 basically all other «chapter:verse» combinations actually hꜹe an occult significance (perhaps in relation to the verse itself), 🙵 (thus) were planned from the beginning by the writers of the bible to hꜹe specific occult meanings, both individually 🙵 collectively with the rest of the text (my best bet is as some sort of subconscious programming 🙵 manifestation tꝏl). Since there are given examples for the other claims relating to biblical numerology contained within the text itself, I am going to let those be.

I hꜹe gꝏd evidence suggesting this claim is completely baseless, 🙵 that the evidence actually suggests the current «chapter:verse» enumeration used by the entire gentile population was entirely coincidental—created by xians themselves over a millennia after xianity began—🙵 has no spiritual/occult significance whatsœver.​

Two Millennia of Clownery​

Let us start from the beginning. The “hebrew bible”, which contains the torah 🙵 the rest of the jewish literary trash, only ever had verse divisions from its inception. There are no records of actual chapter divisions in any of the bꝏks of the hebrew bible until the 14ᵗʰ century.¹ The jewish verse numbering only applies to the “old testament” text, which is only half of the bible. NO “new testament” on earth—the text specially crafted for gentiles, to constantly recite 🙵 memorize—had verse divisions until the 16ᵗʰ century.

From The Catholic Encyclopedia² (emphasis own):

There was no agreement from the very beginning on any fixed verse division, with a complete overhꜷl in the 10ᵗʰ century. It seems unplꜷsible that there was some “deeply magickal, genius, numerological master blueprint” in place which everyone seems to be implying (a specific example given at the end of this post).

Yes, the jewish scribes adopted a chapter numbering system created by a gentile for their own torah becꜷse they deemed it superior to whatever they had.

Ironically, the only source that expouses the idea that the verse numbering is spiritually significant is the talmud itself, which, unsurprisingly, is where the massoretes encoded the idea that their numbering scheme was divine 🙵 should not be touched. Nedarim 37b.5³ states that the “cantillation notes” (which include the verse numberings) are “an integral part of torah study” 🙵 (in the next verse) that all of it was given directly to Moses in Sinai. However, we understand that the talmud is bullshit codified, so these statements can be assumed to hꜹe absolutely zero truth value, especially considering the comedically dubious origin story of the torah.

From Oxford Reference⁴ (emphasis own):​

The xians had various chapter divisions since the beginning of xianity⁵, but Langton's version was what became the global standard.

It was Robert Estienne, a French gentile printer who created the current division of the new testament into verses.⁶ Estienne was a prolific figure in 16ᵗʰ century typography, hꜹing nicknames like ‘Printer to the King’ 🙵 ‘royal typographer’—he basically founded the Latin literary world during the early stages of print. It was for his printing of new Latin editions of the bible that he decided to come up with a new verse numbering system for the new testament, 🙵 simply used the existing old testament numbering from the jews (who had gotten it from Langton a couple centuries prior). The man was persecuted by the Church for being a protestant 🙵 making “problematic theological commentary” in his works, 🙵 was a refugee in Geneva for almost a decade before his death in 1559, which was where he printed his Latin bible editions.

To summarize this section into a couple of sentences⁷:​

The Counterargument​

For the sake of argument, let us assume that the bible writer cabal (roman jews, massoretes, catholics, whœver) actually had planned the entire chapter 🙵 verse structure of the bible, either since the foundation of the jewish nation or during the pre-xian Roman era.

If the original jewish verse numbering (no chapters, just verses) was meant to be a subconscious magickal working, why would the jews allow the jewish literature in the hands of the gentiles to not contain this numbering for ≈15 centuries as they went 🙵 theologically conquered the entire Old World?

“They could hꜹe decided to introduce it after the invention of the printing press!” Okꜽ, then if they finally did decide to insert the magickal numbering after ≈15 centuries, why was—​

• it done by two different gentiles at different times 🙵 locations, both hꜹing a very low likelyhꝏd of collusion with jews​
• the chapter division different from both the ancient xian (which could hꜹe very well been of jewish origin) 🙵 ancient jewish divisions​
• that new chapter division adopted by the jews themselves for their own hebrew bible?​

Why would the jews adopt a chapter system created by a gentile into their own literature 🙵 combine it with their existing verse system if the numbering had a preplanned occult significance?

“Stephan Langton could hꜹe been a shabbos goy!” This would require that the man (a) was secretly a jew, or (b) collaborated with jews from inside the Catholic Church, who provided him with the magickal chapter numbering to claim as his own work. Both seem quite unreasonable. Langton was the key individual behind the Magna Carta of 1215, hꜹing been involved in various controversies with the both the Church 🙵 the English throne—at one point hꜹing been exiled from England itself—after which he spent the rest of his life trying to free it from papal control. Just read his biography 🙵 tell me if you think this man really could hꜹe had jewish connections.

What I am hoping for by making this thread is for someone to provide an explanation for how the current biblical «chapter:verse» numbering system could hꜹe been a premeditated jewish magickal working, or even better, to provide an actual example of this enumeration serving as witchcraft. I think that to believe this is to give tꝏ much credence to the absolute literary waste bin that is the bible—consider that believing this would also give validity to the “bible gematria” retards who perform a bunch of pseudo-math 🙵 bullshit “calculations” using verse numbers, word counts, 🙵 letter-value systems in order to “““prove””” that jewhovah is the OneTrueGod™; they even go so far to claim that reality itself is based on hebrew letters (the Jewtrix).

Now, let us take a lꝏk at an example of this belief at work. In this post, a member tries to show how English phrases related to the black race correspond with certain «chapter:verse» numberings in the bible. They state pretty much the same sources for the claim as I do (HPS Maxine's writings), 🙵 then go off the deep end (emphasis own):​

(That ‘4’ is a nonexistent reference by the wꜽ.) A few sentences later:

…????????

They claim that “the «chapter:verse» summed describes who the verse curse is meant for” 🙵 then link English language terms to the numbering through gematria nonsense. How could jews in pissræl 2,000 years ago hꜹe known what English even was, let alone the modern spelling of these terms that this entire gematria system is critically reliant upon, 🙵 then decide that this language was the one they were going to write the bible verses and create their system for? How could they then hꜹe cꝏrdinated with some Catholic archbishop 1,300 years later to provide the critical chapter numbers necessary to calculate the spꝏky curse number through the arbitrary arithmetic operation of addition (why not subtraction or multiplication?)? How dœs a hebrew 🙵 Greek text written before England itself hꜹe anything to do with English? This sort of fantastical postulation is inane.

Like, I can create any letter-value system to make a certain group of words be equal in value, come up with some arbitrary calculation system to make external values alwꜽs result in the desired value, 🙵 then claim “this number is coded over this topic!”. Gematria is literally retards gawking at rehashed versions of the ‘Alwꜽs 4’ math trick from primary schꝏl. At least the xian bible gematria retards only conduct gematria shit with the biblical text in its original languages (ancient hebrew 🙵 Koine Greek).​

Conclusion​

The number of bꝏks in the bible, the number of chapters in a bꝏk, the number of verses in a bꝏk/chapter, etc. is utterly arbitrary 🙵 cannot be justified as some “seekret kabbalistic coding”, 🙵 any numerological claims based on them are invalid. There is simply tꝏ much historical volatility 🙵 spatio-temporal disconnect for these values to hꜹe been premeditated. By engaging in this sort of speculation, not only is one rejecting sound historical record, but they are walking down the path of turning the jews into a kind of deus ex machina—something Evola explicitly warned us against in his Preface to ‘The Protocols of the Elders of Zion’:​

I am afraid that in this case, the deeper investigation was not conducted, 🙵 I hꜹe had to provide rectification for a (type of) belief that, while seemingly harmless 🙵 valid on the surface, mꜽ lead one down very long lines of erroneous thought.

---

References​

[1]: G. F. Moore, “The Vulgate Chapters and Numbered Verses in the Hebrew Bible.” Journal of Biblical Literature 12, № 1 (1893): 73–78.

[2]: John Francis Fenlon, “Hebrew Bible,” in The Catholic Encyclopedia 7, (New York: Robert Appleton Company, 1910).
[3]: Nedarim 37b.5‒6,The William Davidson Talmud (Koren–Steinsaltz) 18 (2015).
[4]: “Bible divisions and references.” Oxford Reference. ; Accessed 14 Jul. 2024.
[5]: James Snapp, Jr., “Kephalaia: The Ancient Chapters of the Gospels,” The Text of the Gospels, April 15, 2016.
[6]: “The Printer's Device: Robert Estienne's Numbering of Verses and the Changing Form of the New Testament in the 15th and 16th Centuries,” Pitts Theology Library. ; Accessed 14 Jul. 2024.
[7]: Chris Heard, “Why are Biblical Chapters and Verses Numbered?” Bible Odyssey. ; Accessed 14 Jul. 2024.​

I think you provided evidence that some of the verses were subject to changes in numerology, but you are using that to conclude that any sort of numerology does not exist, despite that being a cornerstone of magick, even on a beginner level.

The Bible was intended as a spiritual weapon, and although we shouldn't be scared by it, we have to recognize that it did cause significant damage. For there to be some degree of competency involved in construction of this weapon shouldn't be surprising.

In this post by HPS Maxine, she elaborates on the numerology from books of the Old Testament. She is using English in her interpretation, despite the original languages being something else.

You seem to be asking how English and the original languages could correlate, but I don't see why this is a problem. My assumption is that someone like an Archbishop or other expert, well-studied in both languages and numerology, translated both elements of the text in a way that preserved the spiritual intent.

You note how Robert printed his own numerical system into the Bible, but you also write how the Church tried to persecute him for his "commentary". My guess is that they were mad at him for messing with this. I don't take his changes to mean the original Jewish authors didn't employ numerology.

Another thing you must consider here is that numerology doesn't need to be necessarily labeled. If a verse exists as the 9th verse, this still acts as a component of numerology, whether or not I actually write "9" next to it. So I don't see how the labeling itself is much of a problem.

If the authors of the Talmud or other previous enemy texts employ occult numbering, why would they not do this for the Bible or other works? I don't look at this like a "super secret coding", but just the implementation of technology into the design of a weapon.

To me, it is like the engineering of a sword or something. To those who don't know, they won't understand the full intention behind the design, therefore they may change it. Similarly, just because a manual was not included to elaborate on it, doesn't mean the original design technique wasn't employed, especially given that we know the designers employed the technique within their other works, too.

It would be too far to claim that the enemy does not employ occult numbering within their text at all. I think your research only supports that it could have been possibly altered or translated, either correctly or incorrectly. Remember also that the enemy has stolen our technology, so what they do is a reflection of the work they had stolen it from, like the Greeks or Egyptians.

 

[Karnonnos [JG]]

The Torah goes in a sequence divided by parashah which Rabbi Solomon (Rashbah, who was one of the greatest authorities in Judaism at the time) would have interpreted the numbers. Isaak Nathan ben Kalonymus based his Meir Natib verses on the Vulgata itself. Genesis 41 to 42 should be obvious enough - Pharaoh's dream, Joseph is put in charge of Egypt, while 42 begins with the brothers resolving to go there. 42:13, 'but one is dead' (out of the 13 brothers, while Joseph is in Egypt and the others are bereft), this is blatantly obvious numerology connecting into the number 11, as HPS Maxine indicated. 1:42:13 = 56 divided by 5 is 11 with a remainder of 1 (11.2).

There are numbers within the verses. The Towel of Babel story - the sixth, seventh and ninth sentences are numerologically obvious.

There are obvious numerological factors in the New Testament, even if Stephanus (Estienne) was just inspired by the enemy in his collection of chapters. This can just happen in intense states of belief and being linked to them.

For instance, Galatians 5:22 lists nine fruits of the spirit - 5 + 22 = 27 divided by 3 = 9, 5 + 2 + 2 = 9. You really believe this is a mistake?

Another very IMPORTANT THING HERE, is that around the time of Stephanus innovation, the Bible became theoretically available to MOST PEOPLE at the point the majority of the urban population began to desire literacy. Outside of monasteries, parts of the Bible were scattered and read in piecemeal translated fashion by the nobility. By the average person the Bible was only heard in Latin in church. Most people did not have access to a Bible and could not read it either due to illiteracy, nearly all copies were in Latin.

The numerology would have shifted from something subconscious orally to being read in a subconscious or conscious manner with the printing press and Protestant revolutions. This is often how things happen with the enemy garbage.

 

[Machtträger]

The Bible was intended as a spiritual weapon, and although we shouldn't be scared by it, we have to recognize that it did cause significant damage. For there to be some degree of competency involved in construction of this weapon shouldn't be surprising.

You have not grasped the issue. My point dœs not have anything to do with the text to begin with—I am not talking about the text of the bible at all. The content of the bible is a weapon and it is absolutely dangerous and should be deleted from this world. It is completely feasible that they have built numerological weapons into the text of the bible, and I specifically did not make any argument(s) against that point. I was very explicit about this in the first two paragraphs of my post, was I not?

---

In this post by HPS Maxine, she elaborates on the numerology from books of the Old Testament. She is using English in her interpretation, despite the original languages being something else.

Right, that is the same source (C) I listed at the start of the post. Most of her interpretation is about the meaning of the statements within text itself, which dœsn’t hꜹe anything to do with the language it is expressed in. We’re simply not talking about the same kind of numerology here. I hꜹe to spell it out for you.

Here is an example of a numerology association based on the content of the text:

King Zedekiah [Jeremiah 52:1-11] reigned 11 years before Nebuchadnezzar imprisoned him, murdered his family, and mutilated him.

The fucking numbers assigned to that part of the text are irrelevant.

The statements she makes that are referring to the chapter:verse system, I am arguing as being baseless. For example later in the writ she tries to associate Genesis 11:9 with the 9/11 attacks becꜷse “the numbers are the same”. Really? Come on.

---

You seem to be asking how English and the original languages could correlate, but I don't see why this is a problem. My assumption is that someone like an Archbishop or other expert, well-studied in both languages and numerology, translated both elements of the text in a way that preserved the spiritual intent.

Except you just cannot hidden-hand something like the bible, which xians hꜹe so meticulously performed textual criticism 🙵 historical research for that it is frighteningly (🙵 sadly) the one thing you will lose an argument with a xian apologist over. I hꜹe been there 🙵 learned my lesson, 🙵 I am trying to get you all to also undertake xian criticism with an evidence-based approach.

There is nowhere for you to insert a spꝏky translator. There are only two entry points for the entire numbering system, 🙵 I hꜹe clearly expounded on both of those cases 🙵 the individuals who made the changes. What is even worse for this idea is that neither of them did any translation work—again, I hꜹe to clarify that the content of the text is not even relevant.

---

You note how Robert printed his own numerical system into the Bible, but you also write how the Church tried to persecute him for his "commentary". My guess is that they were mad at him for messing with this. I don't take his changes to mean the original Jewish authors didn't employ numerology.

Again, there was nothing to mess with. The new testament did not hꜹe a verse system, 🙵 he copied the jewish old testament verse system as-is. Furthermore, you don‘t hꜹe to guess at all becꜷse his persecution is well-documented 🙵 has nothing to do with the wꜽ he decided to verse his bibles. He was a convert out of catholicism 🙵 spread humanist renaissance philosophy in his works which the local catholic branch did not like at all.

---

Another thing you must consider here is that numerology doesn't need to be necessarily labeled. If a verse exists as the 9th verse, this still acts as a component of numerology, whether or not I actually write "9" next to it. So I don't see how the labeling itself is much of a problem.

For the new testament, it is not a matter of labelling. There was no verse system to begin with at all. The very divisions themselves did not exist until the 16ᵗʰ century. The original jewish authors just conveniently forgot to employ verse numerology in the new testament 🙵 let their xian followers create their own random chapter orders.
They had their hebrew bibles enumerated using hebrew letters, but those were also conveniently missing from gentile versions of their texts until the events I described.

---

I don't look at this like a "super secret coding", but just the implementation of technology into the design of a weapon.

I used that phrase in the connotation of it being some grand scheme by super-intelligent beings becꜷse of the wꜽ it is just liberally 🙵 ꜷtomatically assumed to be linked to the real world, as if it a priori describes reality. You’re assuming a crꜽon drawing made by retards is actually a marble sculpture. Tꝏ much credit to garbage.

---

It would be too far to claim that the enemy does not employ occult numbering within their text at all. I think your research only supports that it could have been possibly altered or translated, either correctly or incorrectly. Remember also that the enemy has stolen our technology, so what they do is a reflection of the work they had stolen it from, like the Greeks or Egyptians.

Let us assume there was a numbering system in place and it was lost or “mistranslated”. That still nullifies it, and the effect is equivalent to it not hꜹing been there in the first place, and thus my conclusion that numerological statements utilizing those values are invalid still stands. I do not mind conceding to the idea that they had employed a bꝏk № + verse № numerology system in the original jewish old testament: nothing changes.

On the other hand, you have not presented a logical theory as to how a coherent system could have survived or been put into place later down the line. Assuming a hidden hand is not an argument, and without any evidence it is difficult for me to take your response any more seriously than as if you had just said “but it just is!” Please respond to one of the counterargument questions I posited, with a sliver of evidence if possible.

---

There are numbers within the verses. The Towel of Babel story - the sixth, seventh and ninth sentences are numerologically obvious.

Yes, there is numerology within the content of the bible. I think I hꜹe laid this to rest in my above responses.

---

For instance, Galatians 5:22 lists nine fruits of the spirit - 5 + 22 = 27 divided by 3 = 9, 5 + 2 + 2 = 9. You really believe this is a mistake?

I think it’s inane at best, 🙵 arbitrary nonsense for the most part. Where dœs the division by 3 come from? Why division? So what if the value can be mathematically mangled to conform to your predesired value? Even if it’s not a coincidence, that somehow the enumerators cꝏrdinated over millennia to assign “5:22” to this verse, how dœs it matter? How dœs caring about this assist any of our purposes?

There are obvious numerological factors in the New Testament, even if Stephanus (Estienne) was just inspired by the enemy in his collection of chapters. This can just happen in intense states of belief and being linked to them.

. This is not being approached correctly. Outlining numerology in the bible is not going to help people get awꜽ from the bible, it is only going to attract them to it by piquing their interest. As for you even deciding to allow the possibility that Estienne mꜽ hꜹe been “divinely” inspired—do you realize how damaging that is to your credence in front of someone wanting to leꜹe xianity, or a xian who wants to argue against Spiritual Satanism? That kind of shit is literally bꝏsting the enemy’s credibility for free, all so that you can find some sort of support for this pointless belief of a grand occult enumeration.

As I stated earlier, assuming this shit has any actual meaning is a stepping stone towards crediting the xian bible gematria shit 🙵 all of their claims they make about the bible being a numerologically perfect bꝏk written by a perfect jewhovah. You guys are halfwꜽ there already. This is a backfiring path. Removing xianity from society is going to require logical arguments against the validity of the content itself 🙵 exposing the clownfest origins of the text, not proclaiming the epic magical numbers embedded into it.

 

[Blitzkreig [JG]]

You have not grasped the issue. My point dœs not have anything to do with the text to begin with—I am not talking about the text of the bible at all. The content of the bible is a weapon and it is absolutely dangerous and should be deleted from this world. It is completely feasible that they have built numerological weapons into the text of the bible, and I specifically did not make any argument(s) against that point. I was very explicit about this in the first two paragraphs of my post, was I not?

---

Right, that is the same source (C) I listed at the start of the post. Most of her interpretation is about the meaning of the statements within text itself, which dœsn’t hꜹe anything to do with the language it is expressed in. We’re simply not talking about the same kind of numerology here. I hꜹe to spell it out for you.

Here is an example of a numerology association based on the content of the text:

The fucking numbers assigned to that part of the text are irrelevant.

The statements she makes that are referring to the chapter:verse system, I am arguing as being baseless. For example later in the writ she tries to associate Genesis 11:9 with the 9/11 attacks becꜷse “the numbers are the same”. Really? Come on.

---

Except you just cannot hidden-hand something like the bible, which xians hꜹe so meticulously performed textual criticism 🙵 historical research for that it is frighteningly (🙵 sadly) the one thing you will lose an argument with a xian apologist over. I hꜹe been there 🙵 learned my lesson, 🙵 I am trying to get you all to also undertake xian criticism with an evidence-based approach.

There is nowhere for you to insert a spꝏky translator. There are only two entry points for the entire numbering system, 🙵 I hꜹe clearly expounded on both of those cases 🙵 the individuals who made the changes. What is even worse for this idea is that neither of them did any translation work—again, I hꜹe to clarify that the content of the text is not even relevant.

---

Again, there was nothing to mess with. The new testament did not hꜹe a verse system, 🙵 he copied the jewish old testament verse system as-is. Furthermore, you don‘t hꜹe to guess at all becꜷse his persecution is well-documented 🙵 has nothing to do with the wꜽ he decided to verse his bibles. He was a convert out of catholicism 🙵 spread humanist renaissance philosophy in his works which the local catholic branch did not like at all.

---

For the new testament, it is not a matter of labelling. There was no verse system to begin with at all. The very divisions themselves did not exist until the 16ᵗʰ century. The original jewish authors just conveniently forgot to employ verse numerology in the new testament 🙵 let their xian followers create their own random chapter orders.
They had their hebrew bibles enumerated using hebrew letters, but those were also conveniently missing from gentile versions of their texts until the events I described.

---

I used that phrase in the connotation of it being some grand scheme by super-intelligent beings becꜷse of the wꜽ it is just liberally 🙵 ꜷtomatically assumed to be linked to the real world, as if it a priori describes reality. You’re assuming a crꜽon drawing made by retards is actually a marble sculpture. Tꝏ much credit to garbage.

---

Let us assume there was a numbering system in place and it was lost or “mistranslated”. That still nullifies it, and the effect is equivalent to it not hꜹing been there in the first place, and thus my conclusion that numerological statements utilizing those values are invalid still stands. I do not mind conceding to the idea that they had employed a bꝏk № + verse № numerology system in the original jewish old testament: nothing changes.

On the other hand, you have not presented a logical theory as to how a coherent system could have survived or been put into place later down the line. Assuming a hidden hand is not an argument, and without any evidence it is difficult for me to take your response any more seriously than as if you had just said “but it just is!” Please respond to one of the counterargument questions I posited, with a sliver of evidence if possible.

---

Yes, there is numerology within the content of the bible. I think I hꜹe laid this to rest in my above responses.

---

I think it’s inane at best, 🙵 arbitrary nonsense for the most part. Where dœs the division by 3 come from? Why division? So what if the value can be mathematically mangled to conform to your predesired value? Even if it’s not a coincidence, that somehow the enumerators cꝏrdinated over millennia to assign “5:22” to this verse, how dœs it matter? How dœs caring about this assist any of our purposes?

. This is not being approached correctly. Outlining numerology in the bible is not going to help people get awꜽ from the bible, it is only going to attract them to it by piquing their interest. As for you even deciding to allow the possibility that Estienne mꜽ hꜹe been “divinely” inspired—do you realize how damaging that is to your credence in front of someone wanting to leꜹe xianity, or a xian who wants to argue against Spiritual Satanism? That kind of shit is literally bꝏsting the enemy’s credibility for free, all so that you can find some sort of support for this pointless belief of a grand occult enumeration.

As I stated earlier, assuming this shit has any actual meaning is a stepping stone towards crediting the xian bible gematria shit 🙵 all of their claims they make about the bible being a numerologically perfect bꝏk written by a perfect jewhovah. You guys are halfwꜽ there already. This is a backfiring path. Removing xianity from society is going to require logical arguments against the validity of the content itself 🙵 exposing the clownfest origins of the text, not proclaiming the epic magical numbers embedded into it.

I don't have enough information on hand to answer every single one of your questions or examples, however I think the premise of your argument is based on undermining gematria and its presence in the bible in order to attack it more. However, I don't think this is the right move because it is analogous to underestimating the enemy, also the subject of gematria itself.

What we debate here is not what we would use for propaganda against Christians, because you are right that they may get the wrong idea. However, it would also be disingenuous to imply that occult numerology was never at play here.

Christians will always make up some sort of reason as to why their system is flawless. Even if we decide not to talk about the numbers of the bible, then we still have to acknowledge other spiritual elements of the bible, like the fact that its believers are creating and empowering enemy thoughtforms. All of this is real and why we had to spend effort reversing and destroying it.

We should be pointing out how the bible has lead to negative outcomes for people, which does show its unjust power. If it was truly powerless, it would not have enslaved people as it did. However, our efforts and the Gods are stronger, which is why we do not have to worry about giving too much credit to the enemy.

Sure, maybe we should create a sister article to the numerology of the bible where we detail the spiritual technology of the Gods, but either way I believe what HPS Maxine wrote was done so in a successful manner, because she showed how the numbers were connected with negative events, rather than positive ones. That is why someone who reads her article won't be attracted further to Christianity.

For example, she talks about the occult significance and numerology behind the tower of babel, describing the positive elements of this for Gentiles, as well as how the bible ruins it for us. Written in such a way, I don't see how someone would be more attracted to the bible, unless they were already along that pathway and ideology to begin with.

I don't think there is anything wrong with giving accurate descriptions of the enemy, so long as we implement this to destroy them in the end. To create the RTR's, our Clergy had to study and create these rituals against "the power" of the enemy. They could not just assume it was powerless for the sake of argumentation or propaganda. If this is misunderstood by certain Christians, who would have to ignore all the 100s of other pro-Satanic articles, then that is more of their fault, nor ours.

 

[Machtträger]

I don't have enough information on hand to answer every single one of your questions or examples, however I think the premise of your argument is based on undermining gematria and its presence in the bible in order to attack it more. However, I don't think this is the right move because it is analogous to underestimating the enemy, also the subject of gematria itself.

What we debate here is not what we would use for propaganda against Christians, because you are right that they may get the wrong idea. However, it would also be disingenuous to imply that occult numerology was never at play here.

I am simply seeking we be more accurate in our assessment of reality. The anti-gematria argument is secondary. My primary argument is simply a historical one: It is extremely unlikely that the bible verse numbers are numerological programming becꜷse of the wꜽ they developed over the course of history. And then I built on it: therefore, we probably shouldn’t be making bible numerology claims based on those verse numbers—that would be disingenꭣus.

That’s it. That’s my entire argument condensed into 2 sentences. The response to this argument is along the lines of what you stated: “No, there must be some hidden hand involved in the verses tꝏ since numerology is in the content 🙵 in other jewish literature” to which then I respond with the anti-gematria argument, trying to make it clear that even if there is numerology involved, it’s pointless to care 🙵 that we should focus on getting rid of this bꝏk 🙵 its putrid worldly results instead of trying to maintain a deus ex māchinā view of Jews 🙵 their capability to control their literature 🙵 affect reality with it.

“Giving accurate descriptions of the enemy” first begins by admitting to oneself that there are cases in the Jewish campaign where they really aren’t present, hꜹe failed, or hꜹe just given up. Otherwise, one risks (1) pursuing lines of action that are ineffective/a waste of resources, and (2) sending the wrong messages to those enslꜹed on the other side.

In essence, I am espousing an inductive evidence-based approach to tackle the Judeo-Christian scheme, whereas you are recommending a deductive-assumptive “jew-then-think” approach that is uncomfortably close to jūdæus ex māchinā.

 

[Hp. Hoodedcobra666]

The position of numbers and verses, can be changed; however, when the 9/11 happened, the 9:11 aspect was worldwide known in the Bible as it was at the time. The bible has the main structural mechanic being the same, other smaller mechanics here can be changed. This change does not reduce it's effect in the end. What HPS Maxine writes is accurate on the timeline of when the verse was that verse. The energy relation happened at this specific timeline.

What number the verse had in 1526 or something, is inconsequential to the later date, where it had the number appropriated to carry on the attack and open up the mass mind generation of this time, for it. Small alterations are change upon a small pattern, not the whole of the topic of the Bible.

Solidity is not necessary for it to work what it does. It's based on numerological applications.

Yes, the numbering is for witch-craft. The English bible is not consequential, the Torah verses are important and their solidity is what causes the effects. The Bible is just a mass mind alteration tool.