Post Info TOPIC: The Monograph of Time


Moderator

Status: Offline
Posts: 655
Date: 23:31:04 Dec 10, 2013
The Monograph of Time
Permalink   
 


I decided that this subject deserved a post of its own to record my conclusions on the Holographic Image in the Video below - The Fabric of Time. The image is presented precisely at the 3 minute mark and the reader may wish to check it out before reading the rest of this post. The paragraph in italics below the video I typed up yesterday and then I added some more comments on a forum which I will include below that material, then I will give a summary.


In this video (exactly minute 1:00), they show a holographic picture of the man and on his neck is a chunk of wood with three Hebrew Letters on it - Nun, Aleph and Tsadi - spelling the word Na'ats and, according to Strong's Concordance Hebrew Dictionary number 5006, this means Contemned and the very next word following implies he was condemned for Blaspheme. Apparently, the Scholars thought it spelled Lamb, but they forgot the image formation process would reverse the letters.

 

 

 

Anyways, I made some comments on the video on Tangle.com and lets see if they post em.

 

 

 

So, how did that Medieval Painter fake that, may I ask?

 

 

Here is the comment I posted on one of the video's on Tangle.com last night followed by another one this morning on the first video they have of the Hologram, followed by the comments on the second video :

David Hill posted a comment. Monday, November 30, 2009

Ah, that plaque doesn't spell Lamb - it is Nun, Aleph and Tsadi and spells the Hebrew Word Na'ats (Strong's Number 5006) and it means Condemned and, the very next Strong's number tells you what he was condemned for - Blaspheme. I think the scholars might want to rethink their translation. It is probably a Roman Plaque that one of the Soldiers left - probably the one that speared him.


David Hill posted a comment. Tuesday, December 1, 2009

I was thinking about this further last night and realized that this plaque was probably left by the Priesthood the next morning when they went to seal the tomb. They would have had to positively identify the body first, assuredly with Joseph of Arimathea in tow, so they pulled back the Shroud from the face and removed the Olvieto cloth to make the id, which Joseph probably folded up and placed aside, and then they left the plaque and sealed the tomb. This proves the authenticity of the Gospel accounts are reliable eyewitness records of the events and specifically that the priesthood condemned Y'shua for blaspheme. Someone needs to contact those scholars and set them straight on this for this is actually a very powerful witness to the truthfulness of the Gospels and, in turn, of the Resurrection of Y'shua.


http://connect.tangle.com/view_video?viewkey=8399a21743fc4aec4829

David Hill posted a comment. Monday, November 30, 2009

Ah, I think the scholars got it wrong. In this video, they show a holographic picture of the man and on his neck is a chunk of wood with three Hebrew Letters on it - Nun, Aleph and Tsadi - spelling the word Na'ats and, according to Strong's Concordance Hebrew Dictionary number 5006, this means Contemned and the very next word following implies he was condemned for Blaspheme. The scholars forgot to reverse the image since this is a negative the plaque is actually backwards from how it was carved.


David Hill posted a comment. Tuesday, December 1, 2009

I was thinking about this some more last night and realized that this plaque was assuredly left by the priesthood the next morning when they went to seal the tomb - they would have made a positive id of the body first which is when they removed the Olvieto cloth, and then they left this plaque. This proves the veracity of the Gospel accounts and that the priesthood did condemn him on charges of blaspheme. Some one should contact those scholars on this (I don't have the means to at this time) cause this is a powerful testimony to the Word of Y'hava and the Resurrection of Y'shua ben Y'hava.


http://connect.tangle.com/view_video?viewkey=6b0c8d03d03e27d054b9
Now, here is the Hebrew Word Na'ats : נָאַץ : and you can see that it is precisely the word that appears in the video above. The reader should keep in mind that the letters appear in their proper mode - i.e. they are not backwards or reversed - and, therefore, the word itself is also in its proper configuration and should be read as normal Hebrew (right to left) and, therefore, the word is certainly not Lamb but is, in fact, Condemned and that for Blaspheme.

Here is the url for the Blue Letter Bible entry on this Word and the second url is the very next word in the Concordance which is spelled : נֶאָצָה

http://www.blueletterbible.org/lang/lexicon/lexicon.cfm?Strongs=H5006&t=KJV

http://www.blueletterbible.org/lang/lexicon/lexicon.cfm?strongs=H5007&t=KJV

The word that the scholars were thinking of is Strong's Number 6629 Tsone which means to migrate and thus a flock of sheep and here is the Strong's Hebrew word : צַאֲנָן : but the problem is that you have to read the word backwards, as these scholars obviously did, and, further, you have to add another letter - Nun - to the plaque and, conclusively, Nun used at the start of a word is different from the letter Nun that you use at the end of a word and the one they show in the video is, unarguably, the Nun that you use at the start of a word and thus there is only one translation of the monograph possible and that is Condemned.

I honestly don't know how they possibly interpreted the word as Lamb but, apparently, Hebrew is not their forte, cause, he actually reversed the order of the letters in his chart from how they appear in the video thus starting with Ayin instead of Nun but the Nun that is used is that used for the start of a word, not the end, therefor the word is either Nun Aleph Ayin (which, as far as I can tell, does not exist in the Hebrew) or Nun Aleph Tsaddi and I think I have shown that the logical conclusion is that of the latter.

Therefore, I suspect that the letter that he is calling an Ayin is actually the letter Tsadi which completely changes the meaning. He being Dr. Peter Soons, author of The Holographic Image of the Turin Shroud.

Another, point, is that if the word is a Lamb, their is no explanation for placing of the plaque for Y'shua was not known as a Lamb at the time of His death whereas, a plaque condemning him for blaspheme is actually to be expected and it would not surprise me at all if there is some historical record of this practice.

And, finally, the reason the Tsadi looks more like an Ayin is because the width of the plaque does not allow the tail of the Tsadi to extend straight down, so the carver trailed it along side which is another way that this letter can be written.

Well, not to side track any, but as I was trying to find out if it was a custom to inscribe the condemned one's sentence on a burial plaque, I ended up in the Masechet Sanhedrin (Sanhedrin Mishnah) and there (chapter or tractate 7) it states that the man cannot be condemned for blaspheme unless it was done via the Sacred Name at which point in time the hearer was supposed to rend his clothes.

At Y'shua's trial, it was the High Priest who mentioned the Name (Matt 26:63), "And the high priest answered and said unto him, I adjure thee by the living God, that thou tell us whether thou be the Christ, the Son of God." And, at this point in time, Y'shua replies and says, "You said it" knowing they were going to try and condemn him for blaspheme. Point is that it was the High Priest who said the sacred name, not Y'shua, thus, if anyone was guilty of blaspheme, it was the High Priest, not Y'shua.

Here is some more interesting info that directly bears upon the subject.

"Of all Tobit’s virtues, it is his burying the dead that is his greatest (1:18–20; 2:3–8; 4:3–4; 6:15; 14:10–13).3 Some of the persons whose bodies Tobit buries evidently had been executed by state authority, and not simply murdered: “And if Sennacherib the king put to death any who came fleeing from Judea, I buried [e1qaya] them secretly. . . . When the bodies were sought by the king, they were not found” (1:18).4 The dead man mentioned in 2:3, whom Tobit also buries, was also executed, either strangled (so the RSV) or “exposed,” in the sense of being publicly hanged (as Moore argues.) 5 This Jewish sense of obligation that Jews executed by gentile authorities must be buried, even at personal risk, is very significant for the present study.

Concern with proper burial continues beyond the first century. For the Rabbis burial of the dead, according to George Foot Moore, “was regarded as a duty of the highest obligation.”6 He cites b. Meg. 3b, where this duty (hwcm tm) takes precedence in the study of the Law, the circumcision of one’s son, or in the offering of the Passover lamb, and Sipre Num. §26 (on Num 6:6–8), where even a high priest or a Nazirite has the obligation to bury a “neglected corpse,” since there is no one else to do it.

Deut 21:22–23 speaks of one put to death and then hanged, 11QTemple speaks of one hanged “until dead.” Most think crucifixion is in view (as also in 4QpNah 3–4 i 6– 8). It is also important to note that this form of execution is linked to treason.7

The commands of Scripture, taken with traditions regarding piety (as especially exemplified in Tobit), corpse impurity, and the avoidance of the defilement of the land, strongly suggest that under normal circumstances (i.e., peacetime) no corpse would remain unburied—neither Jew nor Gentile, neither innocent nor guilty. All were to be buried. What is especially interesting is that some of the tradition reviewed may have been specifically linked to, even produced by, priests (as in the materials from Qumran). If this is the case, then the relevance of these laws and traditions for the execution of Jesus of Nazareth and its aftermath becomes more evident.

M. Sanh. 6:5–6 implies that bodies are still identifiable, long after decomposition of the flesh.28 How was this done? We don’t know, but evidently the Jewish people knew how to mark or in some way identify a corpse, so that it could be retrieved some time later."http://www.craigaevans.com/Burial_Traditions.pdf


And, here is another interesting tidbit - a condemned man could only be buried next to a like condemned man which, then, would require marking the condemned with his sentence so that they wouldn't bury a righteous man next to him. Further, no positive identification of the body could be legally performed after three days which is similar to being able to positively identify the individual months later, as mentioned in the above article.

"Talmudic interpretation held that the mere fact of a disgraceful death, and the stain of wickedness it entailed, required burial in a special graveyard, since the corpse could only be placed next to others of like indignity--as noted above, this was the purpose of having two graveyards reserved for different kinds of criminals.

The law stated that “You cannot testify to [the identity of a corpse] save by the facial features together with the nose, even if there are marks of identification in his body and garments: again, you can testify only within three days [of death].”

http://ozzycda.blogspot.com/2009/05/full-article-death-and-burial-in.html

And here is some real pertinent information, but I can't tell if this is the same inscription as that of the video. Interestingly enough, this came out just the other day.The Times of London : November 21, 2009
Death certificate is imprinted on the Shroud of Turin, says Vatican scholar

A Vatican scholar claims to have deciphered the "death certificate" imprinted on the Shroud of Turin, or Holy Shroud, a linen cloth revered by Christians and held by many to bear the image of the crucified Jesus.

Dr Barbara Frale, a researcher in the Vatican secret archives, said "I think I have managed to read the burial certificate of Jesus the Nazarene, or Jesus of Nazareth." She said that she had reconstructed it from fragments of Greek, Hebrew and Latin writing imprinted on the cloth together with the image of the crucified man.


The shroud, which is kept in the royal chapel of Turin Cathedral and is to be put in display next spring, is regarded by many scholars as a medieval forgery. A 1988 carbon dating of a fragment of the cloth dated it to the Middle Ages.

However Dr Frale, who is to publish her findings in a new book, La Sindone di Gesu Nazareno (The Shroud of Jesus of Nazareth) said that the inscription provided "historical date consistent with the Gospels account".

The letters, barely visible to the naked eye, were first spotted during an examination of the shroud in 1978, and others have since come to light.


Like the image of the man himself the letters are in reverse and only make sense in negative photographs. Dr Frale told La Repubblica that under Jewish burial practices current at the time of Christ in a Roman colony such as Palestine, a body buried after a death sentence could only be returned to the family after a year in a common grave.

A death certificate was therefore glued to the burial shroud to identify it for later retrieval, and was usually stuck to the cloth around the face. This had apparently been done in the case of Jesus even though he was buried not in a common grave but in the tomb offered by Joseph of Arimathea.

Dr Frale said that many of the letters were missing, with Jesus for example referred to as "(I)esou(s) Nnazarennos" and only the "iber" of "Tiberiou" surviving. Her reconstruction, however, suggested that the certificate read: "In the year 16 of the reign of the Emperor Tiberius Jesus the Nazarene, taken down in the early evening after having been condemned to death by a Roman judge because he was found guilty by a Hebrew authority, is hereby sent for burial with the obligation of being consigned to his family only after one full year". It ends "signed by" but the signature has not survived.

Dr Frale said that the use of three languages was consistent with the polyglot nature of a community of Greek-speaking Jews in a Roman colony. Best known for her studies of the Knights Templar, who she claims at one stage preserved the shroud, she said what she had deciphered was "the death sentence on a man called Jesus the Nazarene. If that man was also Christ the Son of God it is beyond my job to establish. I did not set out to demonstrate the truth of faith. I am a Catholic, but all my teachers have been atheists or agnostics, and the only believer among them was a Jew. I forced myself to work on this as I would have done on any other archaeological find."
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/faith/article6925371.ece



Nope! - It appears that the Death Certificate occurs over the face of the man on the Shroud. Thus this means that there could also have been included a piece of wood or clay that recorded the condemned man's sentence which was placed over his throat.


The Associated Press writes that Frale "believes the text was written on a document by a clerk and glued to the shroud over the face so the body could be identified by relatives and buried properly. Metals in the ink used at the time may have allowed the writing to transfer to the linen, Frale claimed." She details her findings in a new book, La Sindone di Gesu Nazareno (The Shroud of Jesus of Nazareth)

http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2009/11/death_certificate_could_be_sig.html

Well, anyways, I hope that she somehow scans the image of the letters onto the net so the world can see what she is talking about cause, an image is worth a thousand words.



-- Edited by Theoferrum on Monday 11th of January 2016 09:41:51 PM

__________________

Welcome to my World...


Page 1 of 1  sorted by
 Add/remove tags to this thread
Quick Reply

Please log in to post quick replies.

Tweet this page Post to Digg Post to Del.icio.us
Members Login
Google+

Create your own FREE Forum
Report Abuse
Powered by ActiveBoard