The City of Henok

daq · May 6, 2024

In Genesis 4:17 there is one named Henok, the first by that name, and this first Henok then has a son who is also named Henok, and it comes to pass that this first Henok builds a city, and he names the city according to the name of his son who is also named Henok. It is important that the text specifically states that this first Henok is produced by Qain's wife, instead of simply saying that he was produced by Qain: this is a distinguishing characteristic and factor to be reckoned with in our understanding of the text, for it is highlighted by the fact that for the remainder of the genealogy the sons are all stated to have been produced through their fathers, not their mothers, while only this first Henok is said to be produced by his mother, instead of Qain. This appears to be why the reading appears somewhat difficult at the beginning of the statement which follows, (Gen 4:18a), and in studying this I noticed something strange: the next son is named Irad, but that name is the same word for a city, iyr, with the letter dal attached onto the end of it. Is this just a mere coincidence or is it significant? In light of what precedes this in the previous statement, regarding the first city ever mentioned in the scripture, it appears to be significant, at least imho. The following is my tentative reading.

בראשית 4:17-8 Hebrew Bible
וידע קין את אשתו ותהר ותלד את חנוך ויהי בנה עיר ויקרא שם העיר כשם בנו חנוך׃
ויולד לחנוך את עירד ועירד ילד את מחויאל ומחייאל ילד את מתושאל ומתושאל ילד את למך׃

B'reshiyt-Genesis 4:17-18
17 And Qain knew his wife, and she conceived and produced Ḥenok, and it came to pass that he [Ḥenok] built a city, [עיר] and he called the name of the city according to the name of his son, Ḥenok:
18 And he to-for-of Ḥenok begat Irad [עיר+ד, (city+d)] .......

It appears to me that it may be quite possible that one of these two named Henok produces Irad, (a city?), while the other ends up in the next passage as the son of Yared, which is very similar to Irad, (as are most of the other names in Genesis 4 similar to names in the next passage with only slight spelling changes, and Lamek isn't changed at all, and is almost surely the same Lamek). And if one is able see the genealogy of the next passage as those having been born from above, a spiritual seed line of those who came to believe, then it is truly possible that Henok of Breshiyt 5 was physically born some time before he was born from above and became a son of Adam.

I am already fully aware of the standard English translations and readings for the above text, and how they assume that Qain is the builder of the city, however, I say, they are "not following the pronouns", (as they say), so an argument in favor of that view would only be counterproductive to the whole purpose of this thread and the things I would like to explore herein.

daq · May 6, 2024

In the heavenly ABGaD the fourth letter is Dliy, a water bucket for drawing water from a well, so the letter itself denotes such things as drawing water, etc., etc., and is employed in the scripture by the same word.

Exodus 2:16-17
16 And the Kohen of Midian had seven daughters: and they came and drew water, [H1802 Dalah] and filled the troughs to water the flock of their father.
17 And the shepherds came and drove them away: but Mosheh stood up and helped them, and watered their flock.

Numbers 24:7
5 How goodly are your tents, O Yakob, and your tabernacles, O Yisrael!
6 As the valleys they are spread forth, as gardens beside the river, as the aloe trees which YHWH has planted, and as cedar trees beside the water:
7 He pours out the water from his bucket, [H1805 Dliy] and his seed shall be in many waters, and his king shall be higher than Agag, and his kingdom shall be exalted.

It therefore may well be that Irad, (iyr+dliy), speaks of a city drawing water. Moreover this city appears to be recognized also in the beginning otiot-letters of the ABGaD written in the heavens by the finger of Elohim. The first letter is Ayil, the Ram, and corresponds to the modern constellation called Aries in western culture. The second letter is Beit the House. The third letter is Gizeh-Gizoh, a cut stone represented by its angle, and a form of this word is also found in the scripture, in Exo 20:25, and where Shelomoh builds the first Temple, that is, the word Geziyth, a hewn stone or stones, as found in 1Kngs 5:17, 1Kings 6:36, 1Kings 7:9-12, (3 times), 1Chr 22:2, and in Isa 9:10, Lam 3:9, Eze 40:42, and Amos 5:11. The root word for this word Geziyth is Gizeh, a cut or hewn stone, which was the same in Aramaic, and which passed from Aramaic into Arabic, which was used for the naming of the Gizeh Plateau, named rightly so because of the hewn stones of the pyramids thereon.

From Gesenius we have somewhat of an etymology for geziyth/gaziyth, showing the root to be gizeh/gizoh. I have downloaded the page image file, (Gesenius P.187), and have outlined the two pertinent entries in blue boxes.

Beth 0187 - Gesenius Hebrew and English Lexicon

Cut, hew, stone, divide, Gizoh, Gizonite, mow, shear, cut, shorn, Gazez, shaven, squared, strip-off, flay, pluck, take by force, seize, strip, spoil, rob, peep, robbery, plunder, spooling, violence, plunder, injustice

gesenius.org

Moreover the angled portion of the casing stones for the pyramids all reveal the original form of the letter Gizeh as it is written in the heavens by the finger of Elohim. The bottom line of a side view of one of the casing stones together with its outer edge formed by the angle of the cut is the letter Gizeh, the third letter of the ABGaD.

The city drawing water, (iyr+dliy), is Gizeh, on the Gizeh Plateau, the city of hewn stones, (geziyth).
The city of Henok.

Yahudim · May 7, 2024

I was working on a new thread and putting the finishing touches on the Op when my browser burped and I lost it in it's entirety. At first, I was more than a little irritated. Frantically, I tried every trick I know to salvage my work. But then I read your work here and realized it may have been a blessing in disguise. Kudos @daq !!! This is fascinating!!! I'll revisit my stuff later.

Expect me to compose a fitting reply as soon as I pick up my jaw and reinsert it into my face. There will be questions!

Yahudim · May 7, 2024

daq said:
In Genesis 4:17 there is one named Henok, the first by that name, and this first Henok then has a son who is also named Henok, and it comes to pass that this first Henok builds a city, and he names the city according to the name of his son who is also named Henok.

I am loathe to admit that I have noticed this first part of your exposition of the text on my own, but I moved on not understanding the significance. It is clear, based on the repetition of the name 'Henok' that we are to take special notice. Generally speaking, repetition in His Word is a form of emphasis and a flag. With prayer, I may be able to contribute more.

It is interesting that there are different progeny of the same name from different progenitors mentioned in both similar and significantly different circumstances and in relationship to identical topics; progeny, progenitors, rebirth, cities (read: congregations), even the definition of the name Hanoch. All are artifacts that have both spiritual and prophetic significance in many other biblical narratives. I was reading of Jude 1 for a more nuanced perception of the spiritual implications of these various components associated with this topic and was struck by the definition of the name Henoch and certain verses of Jude.

Jude 1:11-16

11 Woe to them! for they went in the way of Cain, and in the deception of Balaam's wages were they poured out, and in the contradiction of Korah they perished.
12 These are the reefs in your love feasts, carousing with you fearlessly, shepherding themselves; waterless clouds carried aside by winds; trees that are sear, unfruitful, twice dying, uprooted;
13 wild billows of the sea, frothing forth their own shame; straying stars, for whom the gloom of darkness has been kept for an eon.
14 Now Enoch, the seventh from Adam, prophesies to these also, saying, "Lo! the Lord came among ten thousand of His saints,
15 to do judging against all, and to expose all the irreverent concerning all their irreverent acts in which they are irreverent, and concerning all the hard words which irreverent sinners speak against Him."
16 These are murmurers, complainers, going according to their desires, and their mouth is speaking pompous things, marveling at the aspect of things, on behalf of benefit.

The above, including what you observed, comes into sharp relief against the definition and etymology of the name in question. From חנך | Abarim Publications Theological Dictionary (Old Testament Hebrew)

Abarim Publications Theological Dictionary

חנך
Some scholars (HAW Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament) say there are two different roots חנך (hanak) - one having to do with the mouth and the other with to dedicate or inaugurate - while others (BDB Theological Dictionary) insist that there's only one super-root of which the meaning was lost. According to BDB, the super-root חנך (hnk) also pops up in cognate languages, but not so that a meaning can be extracted. Its derivatives are:

The masculine noun חך (hek), meaning mouth or palate (Job 29:10, Proverbs 5:3). Another, more common word for mouth is פה (peh), which emphasizes the mouth's opening or edges; our noun חך (hek) emphasizes taste and particularly discernment via taste, which is the first kind of discernment a baby learns to master. Note that our modern take on wisdom is very comfortable with comparing knowledge with light and sight, and ties hearing to obeying, but acknowledges very little connection between taste and early learning. The Bible, on the other hand, places great emphasis on a proper inauguration to wisdom via the sense of taste: Sin entered the world via eating (Genesis 3:6), and participation in the body of Christ is initiated via eating (John 6:54). Canaan was a land proverbially of milk and honey, which of course discusses wisdom rather than cuisine (Ezekiel 3:3, 1 Corinthians 3:2). "Does not the ear test words, as the חך (hek) tastes food?" (Job 12:11, 34:3); "How sweet are Your words to my חך (hek)!" (Psalm 119:103).

The verb חנך (hanak), meaning to inaugurate, train or dedicate. BDB says that this verb came from the preceding noun, through the custom of midwives teaching newborns how to suck by rubbing their palate with chewed dates. The verb is used in the sense of to train (Proverbs 22:6) and to dedicate (1 Kings 8:63).
The adjective חניך (hanik), meaning trained or experienced (Numbers 26:5 only).

The feminine noun חנכה (hanukka), meaning dedication (Psalm 30:1, Numbers 7:10, Nehemiah 12:27). This noun returns in the name of the Feast Of Dedication: Hanukkah (John 10:22).
The feminine noun חכה (hakka), meaning hook, and specifically a hook fastened in a jaw; a fish hook (Job 41:1, Isaiah 19:8).

חכה
Spelled the same as the previous noun, the verb חכה (haka) means to wait or await for. Perhaps the similarity with the previous is accidental but more likely this verb speaks of a waiting the way a hunter or fisherman waits for his prey, or a baby waits for its mother's milk: a waiting specifically for sustenance. Hence the servant of Elisha wants to do his business and not wait for any reaction or confirmation (2 Kings 9:3), and a band of raider waits for a man with the distinctive aim to feed on his resources (Hosea 6:9).

Specifically, most of such waiting is done for YHWH, which obviously speaks of the benefit and sustenance gained from knowledge of creation (Psalm 33:20, Isaiah 8:17, Zephaniah 3:8). And in turn "The Lord longs to be gracious to you, and therefore He waits on high to have compassion on you" (Isaiah 30:18).

More to come...

be(t)et lamed resh · May 7, 2024

טז וַיֵּצֵא קַיִן, מִלִּפְנֵי יְהוָה; וַיֵּשֶׁב בְּאֶרֶץ-נוֹד, קִדְמַת-עֵדֶן.

16 And Cain went out from the presence of the LORD, and dwelt in the land of Nod, on the east of Eden.

Dalet is the door on the eastern side of the House, 4th letter as the corner of cube. This is known due to instructions handed down in shemot.
As per pronouns chanok was the foundational name of a city/house laid by quayin. .

יז וַיֵּדַע קַיִן אֶת-אִשְׁתּוֹ, וַתַּהַר וַתֵּלֶד אֶת-חֲנוֹךְ; וַיְהִי, בֹּנֶה עִיר, וַיִּקְרָא שֵׁם הָעִיר, כְּשֵׁם בְּנוֹ חֲנוֹךְ.

17 And Cain knew his wife; and she conceived, and bore Enoch; and he builded a city, and called the name of the city after the name of his son Enoch.

?.
Naming a foundation's land after the first born male seems obvious. Renaming the land is a different story.
Are u saying that mitzraim was built by cain?
A contrast to the foundation stone/Word laid by Adonai.

be(t)et lamed resh · May 7, 2024

Just gotta say, the pyramids in egypt are cement, not cut stone. Hence the loss of forest due to worthless greed

daq · May 8, 2024

Yahudim said:
I am loathe to admit that I have noticed this first part of your exposition of the text on my own, but I moved on not understanding the significance. It is clear, based on the repetition of the name 'Henok' that we are to take special notice. Generally speaking, repetition in His Word is a form of emphasis and a flag. With prayer, I may be able to contribute more.

It is interesting that there are different progeny of the same name from different progenitors mentioned in both similar and significantly different circumstances and in relationship to identical topics; progeny, progenitors, rebirth, cities (read: congregations), even the definition of the name Hanoch. All are artifacts that have both spiritual and prophetic significance in many other biblical narratives. I was reading of Jude 1 for a more nuanced perception of the spiritual implications of these various components associated with this topic and was struck by the definition of the name Henoch and certain verses of Jude.

Jude 1:11-16

The above, including what you observed, comes into sharp relief against the definition and etymology of the name in question. From חנך | Abarim Publications Theological Dictionary (Old Testament Hebrew)

More to come...

Thanks for that link and the quote. I was hoping to eventually get into this and much more similar things but there is so much I really wasn't even sure where to begin. So I left it up to Elohim and who and how the responses here might lead.

In some of the Aramaic fragments of the DSS the more ancient spelling of Henok appears, that is, without the waw, and J.T. Milik makes mention of this in his extremely important work on the Henok fragments from the DSS. Here is what he says about it on Pg. 141 of that work, which is now open source available online for download in various forms. I'll add a link to internet-archive where you can either read the text online or download the PDF or other formats if you wish.

MILIK - The Book of Enoch Aramaic Fragments Qumran Cave 4 : Jozef T. Milik : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive

MILIK - The Book of Enoch Aramaic Fragments Qumran Cave 4The Enoch Scroll of the texts from Qumran Library Cave 4 has provided parts in Aramaic among the Dead...

archive.org

The name Henok appears in Milik's first copy without the waw, (חנך), and it is right in the opening line of the scroll, and he dates this to be a copy of an older text dating back to the 3rd century BC, (older than most of what is at Qumran). This is significant in several ways and for multiple reasons, (including what you have posted). The reason it is most significant to me is because it supports my contention that the original ABGaD was not a proto-consonantal script but rather a proto-syllabic script.

I myself am not the originator of this argument, Brain Colless, MA BD PhD ThD, has offered a tsunami of critically important information about this subject matter in his blog, CRYPTCRACKER, and although I do not fully agree with all of some of his readings on certain things, I certainly owe him a debt of gratitude and highly suggest a study of his work which goes against the grain of modern scholarship, (for many good reasons).

The proto-syllabic script was originally written on the face of the Great Pyramid in a line of text that probably went around all four sides of its four faces. This wasn't a single line of text but probably enough to fill up one course of masonry in height, so from a distance it would have looked like a ring or band around the side of the pyramid.

The text was called by the Arabs "the heavenly spheres" or "celestial spheres" because some of the letters had circles around them. The circles represented the open mouth phonetic "ah" sound for those letters which were placed within a circle. For example the letter hei, (heh), with a circle around it would have the phonetic sound for the definite article, "hah", with the open mouth vowel sound, the circle representing the shape of the mouth as the vowel is pronounced, (the phonetic sound "ah"). The same letter without a circle around it would be the standard "heh", and thus you would have two vowels for each letter by simply adding a circle to change the vowel to the "ah" sound.

However there were some letters which did not have the standard phonetic "eh" vowel sound, like the letter Nun, which without the circle, ("nah"), would automatically be understood as Nu or No, and thus there was no need to insert a waw in names like Henok because the Nun without a circle around it was automatically the phonetic sound "nu" or "no", (instead of "neh").

The remnants of this ancient principle appear in the opening line of Milik's first copy of Henok, with the name Henok written without the waw, as shown above. In the most ancient texts the name Henok probably never had the waw in its spelling because it wasn't necessary until the language grew and expanded.

In the account given by Ebn Abd Al Hôkm of the contents of the Pyramids of Gizeh, those assigned to the East or Great Pyramid "relate entirely to astrology [astronomy] and associated mysteries." The Arab writer, or rather the earlier historian, Masoudi, whose account he repeats, says, "in the eastern pyramid were inscribed the heavenly spheres".
— The Origin and Significance of the Great Pyramid, C. Staniland Wake, 1882.

Herodotus reports that "inscriptions of strange characters" were to be found on the casing stones of the Great Pyramid. William of Baldensal, a European visitor of the early fourteenth century, mentions that the casing stones were covered with "strange symbols arranged in careful rows". But in 1356, after a large earthquake, residents of Cairo took fallen casing stones from the Great Pyramid to rebuild mosques and fortresses which had been destroyed in the earthquake. The stones were obviously cut into smaller pieces and reshaped, and thus, almost all traces of the ancient inscriptions have been lost.

However, inside the Great Pyramid, no less than six symbols have been discovered in recent times, and all of them are found in the heavenly ABGaD written in the heavens by the finger of Elohim in his creation: Ayil, Chet (Chatzer), Nun, Kaf (Kes), Resh, Ayil-Tel, (the modern Alef-Taw which was formerly the final symbol of the ABGaD as revealed in the heavenly vine of the otiot), and probably Mem, (somewhat damaged, no good photgraphs, so it is hard to be absolutely sure).

Yahudim · May 8, 2024

Thanks @daq - all done.

Yahudim · May 8, 2024

daq said:
Thanks for that link and the quote. I was hoping to eventually get into this and much more similar things but there is so much I really wasn't even sure where to begin. So I left it up to Elohim and who and how the responses here might lead.

In some of the Aramaic fragments of the DSS the more ancient spelling of Henok appears, that is, without the waw, and J.T. Milik makes mention of this in his extremely important work on the Henok fragments from the DSS. Here is what he says about it on Pg. 141 of that work, which is now open source available online for download in various forms. I'll add a link to internet-archive where you can either read the text online or download the PDF or other formats if you wish.

View attachment 347420

MILIK - The Book of Enoch Aramaic Fragments Qumran Cave 4 : Jozef T. Milik : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive

MILIK - The Book of Enoch Aramaic Fragments Qumran Cave 4The Enoch Scroll of the texts from Qumran Library Cave 4 has provided parts in Aramaic among the Dead...

archive.org

The name Henok appears in Milik's first copy without the waw, (חנך), and it is right in the opening line of the scroll, and he dates this to be a copy of an older text dating back to the 3rd century BC, (older than most of what is at Qumran). This is significant in several ways and for multiple reasons, (including what you have posted). The reason it is most significant to me is because it supports my contention that the original ABGaD was not a proto-consonantal script but rather a proto-syllabic script.

I myself am not the originator of this argument, Brain Colless, MA BD PhD ThD, has offered a tsunami of critically important information about this subject matter in his blog, CRYPTCRACKER, and although I do not fully agree with all of some of his readings on certain things, I certainly owe him a debt of gratitude and highly suggest a study of his work which goes against the grain of modern scholarship, (for many good reasons).

The proto-syllabic script was originally written on the face of the Great Pyramid in a line of text that probably went around all four sides of its four faces. This wasn't a single line of text but probably enough to fill up one course of masonry in height, so from a distance it would have looked like a ring or band around the side of the pyramid.

The text was called by the Arabs "the heavenly spheres" or "celestial spheres" because some of the letters had circles around them. The circles represented the open mouth phonetic "ah" sound for those letters which were placed within a circle. For example the letter hei, (heh), with a circle around it would have the phonetic sound for the definite article, "hah", with the open mouth vowel sound, the circle representing the shape of the mouth as the vowel is pronounced, (the phonetic sound "ah"). The same letter without a circle around it would be the standard "heh", and thus you would have two vowels for each letter by simply adding a circle to change the vowel to the "ah" sound.

However there were some letters which did not have the standard phonetic "eh" vowel sound, like the letter Nun, which without the circle, ("nah"), would automatically be understood as Nu or No, and thus there was no need to insert a waw in names like Henok because the Nun without a circle around it was automatically the phonetic sound "nu" or "no", (instead of "neh").

The remnants of this ancient principle appear in the opening line of Milik's first copy of Henok, with the name Henok written without the waw, as shown above. In the most ancient texts the name Henok probably never had the waw in its spelling because it wasn't necessary until the language grew and expanded.

In the account given by Ebn Abd Al Hôkm of the contents of the Pyramids of Gizeh, those assigned to the East or Great Pyramid "relate entirely to astrology [astronomy] and associated mysteries." The Arab writer, or rather the earlier historian, Masoudi, whose account he repeats, says, "in the eastern pyramid were inscribed the heavenly spheres".
— The Origin and Significance of the Great Pyramid, C. Staniland Wake, 1882.

Herodotus reports that "inscriptions of strange characters" were to be found on the casing stones of the Great Pyramid. William of Baldensal, a European visitor of the early fourteenth century, mentions that the casing stones were covered with "strange symbols arranged in careful rows". But in 1356, after a large earthquake, residents of Cairo took fallen casing stones from the Great Pyramid to rebuild mosques and fortresses which had been destroyed in the earthquake. The stones were obviously cut into smaller pieces and reshaped, and thus, almost all traces of the ancient inscriptions have been lost.

However, inside the Great Pyramid, no less than six symbols have been discovered in recent times, and all of them are found in the heavenly ABGaD written in the heavens by the finger of Elohim in his creation: Ayil, Chet (Chatzer), Nun, Kaf (Kes), Resh, Ayil-Tel, (the modern Alef-Taw which was formerly the final symbol of the ABGaD as revealed in the heavenly vine of the otiot), and probably Mem, (somewhat damaged, no good photgraphs, so it is hard to be absolutely sure).

I hope you realize that Adonai answered your prayer, as my revelations, finds and understanding are immediate discoveries. Sometimes, in His infinite grace, He allows me to see things.

I don't want for you to think I understand more than I do as I'm drinking from a fire hose here. Please keep praying because I'm in awe and enthralled - just where I want to be. Btw, more links and pics would be appreciated.

All glory is His!

daq · May 8, 2024

be(t)et lamed resh said:
טז וַיֵּצֵא קַיִן, מִלִּפְנֵי יְהוָה; וַיֵּשֶׁב בְּאֶרֶץ-נוֹד, קִדְמַת-עֵדֶן. 16 And Cain went out from the presence of the LORD, and dwelt in the land of Nod, on the east of Eden.

4th letter as the corner of cube.

The sacred corner cube of the Great Pyramid contains the basis for the sacred geometry of the Antediluvian Patriarchs and also contains the necessary ratio for acquiring the face angle and arris angles of the Great Pyramid. The square base of the cube is four cubits roundabout, with each side being 17.5 thumbs, the Aish or common cubit, which is the cubit of a man, (or a member, iysh, like a rib, Gen 2:22-23, Dan 9:21, ("the iysh Gabriel" is a member of the seven holy Malakim who watch)).

The base of the cube is therefore one cubit square, seventy thumbs round about, (4*17.5=70), and the side angles of the corner stone, (which is within the theoretical cube), are the face angle of the four faces of the Great Pyramid, while the arris or hip angle of the corner stone is the angle of the arris or hip angles of the Great Pyramid.

This arris angle is exactly 42° by the modern Babylonian Sexagesimal circle of 360°, but by the sacred geometry circle, which is a circle divided into 420°, the angle is exactly 49°, (7*7=49). This angle is the angle of the rainbow as it is seen in the sky, in a day of rain, the consummate symbol and sign of the covenant with Noah. The height of the cube is also one cubit, but it is the Rosh Cubit, which is employed strictly for vertical measurements within the pyramid, and the length of this cubit is 22.2857 thumbs, 22 and 2/7ths, for the thumb is subdivided all the way down to fourteenths of a thumb. Then there is also the Mequtzah or Angle Cubit, which is the Aish Cubit plus one hand breadth, 21 thumbs, (17.5+3.5=21).

Moreover the circle with a diameter that is the same as the height of the sacred corner cube is a circle with a circumference of seventy thumbs, regardless of whether it is the Babylonian circle of 360° or the sacred circle of 420°, for the division of the circle into degrees does not change the size, (area), or circumference of the circle. This is the foundation for the sacred geometry of the Antediluvian Patriarchs and it is recorded in the Great Pyramid of Gizeh. The cube has a square base of seventy thumbs while the circle with a diameter of the height of the cube has a circumference of seventy thumbs.

daq · May 8, 2024

be(t)et lamed resh said:
Just gotta say, the pyramids in egypt are cement, not cut stone.

I understand that to be true, many of the stones, especially the casing stones, were poured in-situ, indeed, man-made stone, a technology which was handed down through Noah to his three sons and from them it spread all over the world when the earth was divided at Babel. Those at Babel had lebonah, which is not just white limestone but the correct kind of crushed white limestone for making megalithic stones and, yes, also bricks. The bricks and stone were fired, but the word there is seraph, a special kind of fire not necessarily always meaning fire in the sense that most would now imagine, it can also easily mean a heated or hot chemical reaction.

The pioneer in this newly understood technology in modern times is a Professor by the name of Joseph Davidovits, who has a website dedicated to this field of study, and who has done many experiments which prove his hypothesis to be most assuredly true, (although I do not believe that every single stone in the Great Pyramid is man-made).

Are Pyramids Made Out of Concrete? (1) – Geopolymer Institute

www.geopolymer.org

I myself took his recipe for making stone and did my own experiment with a much smaller piece, simply by taking his recipe down by ratio until I had the amounts for the much smaller piece I was going to attempt. I made this two summers ago, and it has been sitting in the garage since then, and it is harder than limestone but still exuding small amounts of salt on the surfaces, showing that is still is not quite dry on the inside, (the man-made stones of the Great Pyramid have a water content higher than that of the surrounding bedrock and rock formations on the Gizeh Plateau, no doubt for this same reason). My piece took about three hours to set. After six hours I removed the cardboard form which I had made, and when I removed it the pattern from the wet cardboard was left in the sides and the bottom of the piece itself. I sanded the front and a little under half of the top of the piece, and have done no more work on it since then, two summers ago. I am going to go take a picture of it right now and will post it here below for those who might be interested.

This technology of the ancients was so advanced that they were even able to make granite, one of the hardest types of stone known to man, (pretty much only diorite is more dense and harder, but there is also evidence for this kind of man-made stone work in some very delicate vases, and some later Egyptian statues).

https://www.science.org/content/article/early-tools-were-born-fire

In the third chamber of the Great Pyramid, which is four walls all made of great stones of red granite, the stone facing shows to have been treated with a high intensity fire everywhere, (as if having been fired with a very hot flame). The seven Eyes of HE WHO IS are seven crystals placed into the proper stone in the middle of the western wall, (the location of the Holy Holies in the Mishkan and the Temple). These seven eyes are in the midst of two Krubim, ever so lightly engraved in the wall, which stood over of the ark of stone when it was in its correct position in the room. This one may understand by way of the letters Mem-Resh, (Memre, "head of the waters", the Word), found on one of the edges of the ark of stone, which letters mark its placement before the western wall according to the seams in that wall behind it from where it now sets in the room.

Hebrew letter resh on the edge of the ark of stone:

This is not something that may be scribbled into this type of stone with a knife or screwdriver by a tourist: it is solid red granite, which in modern times would require diamond tooling in order to be so precise and not damage the area around the letter. You can see striations on the leg of the resh, on the right side in the image file above, and having been a granite fabricator in profession, I would say that from this image file it looks like it was done with a small, high velocity, spinning blade.

The mem is right next to the resh, but separated by a symbol which has been discussed recently in several threads in topics where Corona Borealis was relevant. This little symbol means to turn, circle, rotate, flip, invert, etc, (the verb form), just as Corona Borealis did in more ancient times when it was nearer to the pole and circled in the heavens without actually setting, (again, as mentioned in Henok, the stars that role over in the fire, (of the horizon), being those that never set). It is not a letter of the ABGaD but an important symbol because ancient writing would often change directions, especially with rock inscriptions and ostraca, (potsherds), and this is what we see on the edge of the ark of stone.

Depending on which side one is standing, either the mem or the resh is inverted, and the symbol for inverting one of them is between the letters signifying how they are to be read: for the resh marks the placement of the ark against the western wall on that particular seam which is connected with the stone of seven eyes above it, and this centers the ark at the precise center of the wall, one rod on each side, (105 thumbs). The measurement for the resh, from its placement on the ark ledge to the outer edge of the ark of stone, was taken by the one who discovered it.

The third chamber of the Great Pyramid is the exact meaurements required to contain the Mishkan-Tabernacle secondary holy place, (it fits inside this room, wall to wall, including the porch). Once one knows the ratio from modern US/UK inch to the thumb, (which is known from the base side measurements of the Great Pyramid), all the measurements within the Great Pyramid fall into place in accordance with the scripture: the scripture is using the same thumb as that which was employed in the Great Pyramid using the sacred geometry of the Antediluvian Patriarchs.

The Krubim:

If you look closely at the following for-sale image file, (which I am not affiliated with in any way but cannot post it here because it is copyrighted material), you can see above the ark on the back wall, (the west wall of the chamber), what are either horns or wings of the Krub on the right hand side. I at first thought them to be horns but after finding them in other image files, and also in the final constellation at the end of the great Vine in the heavens, I am convinced that they are the tops of two sets of wings which cover the heads of the two Krubim.

Strosstock - Inside the King's Chamber

The pattern may be seen in many image files on the web but is hardly noticeable if one does not know to be looking for such a thing. Many image files online also clearly show the seven stars or seven eyes because they light up with the camera flash and glow orange like flames of fire.

Above one may see the tops of the wings at the top of each side of the stone of seven eyes in the western wall. The image file below is an undoctored original image file showing the seven eyes glowing from the camera flash. The faint outline of the wings of the Krubim as they stand on each side of the seven eyes may be seen here too.

daq · May 8, 2024

daq said:
Are Pyramids Made Out of Concrete? (1) – Geopolymer Institute

www.geopolymer.org

I myself took his recipe for making stone and did my own experiment with a much smaller piece, simply by taking his recipe down by ratio until I had the amounts for the much smaller piece I was going to attempt. I made this two summers ago, and it has been sitting in the garage since then, and it is harder than limestone but still exuding small amounts of salt on the surfaces, showing that is still is not quite dry on the inside, (the man-made stones of the Great Pyramid have a water content higher than that of the surrounding bedrock and rock formations on the Gizeh Plateau, no doubt for this same reason). My piece took about three hours to set. After six hours I removed the cardboard form which I had made, and when I removed it the pattern from the wet cardboard was left in the sides and the bottom of the piece itself. I sanded the front and a little under half of the top of the piece, and have done no more work on it since then, two summers ago. I am going to go take a picture of it right now and will post it here below for those who might be interested.

Regarding man-made stone, the recipe from the link in the above quote is essentially crushed limestone, water, natron, (a form of poisonous salt), and magnesium chloride. Magnesium chloride and natron are critically important to the recipe: natron in strong enough forms will kill a living creature and turn it into calcified semi-stone, and magnesium chloride is needed for the final chemical reaction that causes the highly acidic ingredients to essentially neutralize so that the stone mixture sets properly.

The amazing thing I discovered during this experiment, and my studies leading up to it, (while looking for some of these ingredients and how they might be made and where they come from), is that magnesium chloride is used for making popular ice-melting pellets and granules. I discovered in searching for magnesium chloride pellets, (essentially rock salt deicer), is that one of the primary sources for magnesium chloride is the Salt Sea, better known as the Dead Sea, yes, Yisrael.

Put these two together and you can easily understand how Lot's wife did indeed turn into a pillar of salt: it was literal, physical, and really happened, and no doubt Mosheh having been raised in Egypt, in the house of Pharaoh, knew about such things, (including the Pyramids and how they were made, for Mosheh was instructed in all the wisdom of the Egyptians, Acts 7:22).

There is lake in Tanzania called Lake Natron, which is full of highly concentrated natron, (the compound here is mainly due to volcanic ash), and in my research concerning these things I found a site with very revealing image files by Photographer Nick Brandt, with water fowl having been calcified as they stood, swam, or perched on a branch, etc., which is basically to say, turned into semi-stone pillars of salt.

Deadly lake turns animals into statues

The highly caustic Lake Natron in Tanzania kills most animals unlucky enough to enter the water – and calcifies them

www.newscientist.com

Yes, Lot's wife was turned into a pillar of salt, literally.

daq · May 8, 2024

Before I forget, going back to the letter Gizeh, the most probable etymological morphology for that letter would likely be as follows: as shown previously above, the letter Gizeh began as an angled cut stone. However, as to be expected when the natural minded man gets involved, the meaning of the letter began to shift to Garzen, an axe, for the natural minded man has an innate proclivity towards warfare, and thus an affinity for weapons of warfare.

This type of axe is now known as the chalcolithic axe, (bronze age axe), and it had a socketed axe head that slipped over one of the branches of the axe handle. It was made by taking a tree branch at the Y intersection and cutting it off at the elbow, leaving two branches connected at the elbow. One branch was cut short, usually somewhere between six and twelve inches, and this short branch received the socketed end of the axe head, which was made of copper. The copper head typically had a copper loop for a cord near the end of the socketed side of the head, and a strong cord or leather strip was strung through the loop and wound around the socketed end of the head and around the necks of both branches, holding the axe head in place and strengthening the joint at the elbow.

In a written text or script the letter Gizeh would have looked very much like the chalcolithic axe: so the error/change is a natural progression. However the Creator does not think this way and neither did those who worshiped Him when the heavenly ABGaD first became known to them. The chalcolithic axe could be used as a tool in many ways, for cutting and chopping things, but it was primarily a brutal and bloody weapon of war, whether for killing men or for killing animals in close combat situations such as even hunting, (as when a bowman drops a deer, or ram, or elk from a distance, but finds when he approaches the animal that he needs to finish it off because it is still living).

Likely when this began to become prevalent is when the square corner form of the letter Gizeh came into existence, and that was likely in an attempt to counteract the wrong meaning of the letter, (by those who knew the original meaning of the letter and fought against the change in meaning).

It was somewhere in this time frame that writing began to become more widespread, and the Greeks still did not have a writing system for their own language, and what they clearly did was to borrow from the Semitic character set of that time. It was not that they adopted the language, but that they simply borrowed the character set, and they used the similar sounding letters to represent those same sounds in their own language, even though their language was entirely different. This is why so many of the Greek characters look so similar to the Paleo Hebrew script, especially in Uncial or capital forms. The most revealing of such instances would be the Greek capital letter Gamma, which is almost a perfect match with the square corner version of the letter Gizeh, the perfectly square corner of a cut or hewn stone.

This form then, of course, came to be associated with the boomerang or throw stick, and some today even say it is from an Egyptian hieroglyph, (T14), yet another weapon of warfare which cannot be: for the Hebrew ABGaD surely predates the Egyptians, and in fact Egypt was not even a country or nation when the first seven Pyramids were built on the Gizeh Plateau, (despite what Egyptologists would like us all to believe).

As for the letter Resh/Rosh, it should be fairly obvious at this point: human beings do not stand at an angle, so it is not a man's head, (as in the later Egyptian hieroglyph), but much rather it is the chief or head stone of the corner, the Rosh Pinnah, (Psa 118:22), that is, the capstone or pyramidion of a pyramid. Moreover it also contains the letter Gizeh within it: for it is the same except that there is a bar across the center from the short leg to the long side.

Yahudim · May 8, 2024

Let me see if I understand the simplest and most primitive way for making 'bricks' ala the scriptures.

Using a stone/earthen trough where limestone is heated with burning logs made from tightly bound straw until it can be pounded into a fine white powder. This in turn is mixed with sand, white ash and sea water to a consistency resembling wet beach sand that will hold the impression of your palm and fingers when squeezed and released.

A four sided wooden mold is constructed and the mixture is emptied from straw baskets into the mold and tamped into the mold with a substantial block affixed to the end of a vertical pole. As it is tamped, the finer and wetter portion of the mix is forced outward, leaving a slick and shiny surface to the finished block.

When the mixture starts to change color, the form is gently removed and a three sided form is set up against the new block ('brick'). The new block makes up the fourth side of the three sided mold and the next block's seam to the first block is so tightly formed so as a slip of paper could not fit between them.

Sound about right?

daq · May 8, 2024

Yahudim said:
Let me see if I understand the simplest and most primitive way for making 'bricks' ala the scriptures.

Using a stone/earthen trough where limestone is heated with burning logs made from tightly bound straw until it can be pounded into a fine white powder. This in turn is mixed with sand, white ash and sea water to a consistency resembling wet beach sand that will hold the impression of your palm and fingers when squeezed and released.

A four sided wooden mold is constructed and the mixture is emptied from straw baskets into the mold and tamped into the mold with a substantial block affixed to the end of a vertical pole. As it is tamped, the finer and wetter portion of the mix is forced outward, leaving a slick and shiny surface to the finishde block.

When the mixture starts to change color, the form is gently removed and a three sided form is set up against the new block ('brick'). The new block makes up the fourth side of the three sided mold and the next block's seam to the first block is so tightly formed so as a slip of paper could not fit between them.

Sound about right?

It appears you have been reading the link to the Geopolymer Institute? Yes that sounds pretty close if you ask me. Now look at some of the casing stones on the third pyramid: the knob-like protrusions at the bottoms of many of the granite stones are very likely a product of this process, which is also why the outer surfaces of the casing stones are bulging and somewhat rounded. They probably had sacks on the front edges of the forms which had one, two, or three outlets near the bottom so as to allow the excess water in the stone mixture to drain out when the mixture was being stamped down from the top, (the stamping process just as described by Professor Davidovits). It's not difficult to imagine something like screen-socks sewn onto two or three holes at the bottom of a sackcloth, attached to the front of the form, which would have worked like screens only allowing water to seep through, especially with a flat plate, (wood?), placed in the end of a sock that was only three to five inches long hanging out from the bottom of the sack. These remaining red granite casing stones on the third pyramid are said by most to have been left unfinished, (which may or may not be true because they may have been left that way intentionally). The flat-finished portion around the modern entrance here was finished by Pharaoh Menkaure who hijacked this pyramid to use it (apparently) for his own tomb.

See the protrusions or "knobs" at the bottom of the stones just above the group of tourists entering and exiting the pyramid? The knobs are all over the lower third of this pyramid on what remains of the red granite casing stones. Notice the large ones below are flat on the front, as if like I said above, there were sock-screens with flat plates in them attached to the bottom front portion of the forms.

The same technology made its way to the Americas and apparently lasted all the way into the time of the Incas:

2k12.12.05-muros_piedras_centros-14.30.31-2.jpg

Enigmas Regarding The Third Pyramid Of Giza In Egypt: So Called Menkaure - Hidden Inca Tours

Often overlooked because of its small stature, the co called Menkaure pyramid at Giza is as intriguing as its better known giant neighbours. But why is it so much smaller? Here is a quote from National Geographic: ‘Perhaps there wasn’t enough room left at the Giza Plateau. Maybe the cost of...

hiddenincatours.com

These stones in the above image file are very tightly fit together and some of them are even interlocking, as well as having the outward bulge and the knobs at the bottoms of them: they also were poured in situ, poured into place. The same thing may also be seen at many other locations like the Megalithic stone wall at Saksaywaman, (also Peru), and other places.

You may be able to see in this image file below, from Saksaywaman, that it appears the stones have been worked on the surface to flatten them out somewhat, the faces have wide vertical grooves like scoop marks made by using a harder stone to scrape away surface material, (just as the Egyptians used diorite balls for shaping stone, which may be found, and the work seen, at the ancient Aswan quarry where there is still a giant broken obelisk laying abandoned in situ). Note also in the file below that it sure looks like several of the stones have had the drainage knobs simply broken off at the bottom.

I don't know where this next one is from but probably South America.

Archeologists expect everyone to believe these knobs are for lifting these megalithic stones, (ridiculous).

Yahudim · May 8, 2024

daq said:
It appears you have been reading the link to the Geopolymer Institute? Yes that sounds pretty close if you ask me. Now look at some of the casing stones on the third pyramid: the knob-like protrusions at the bottoms of many of the granite stones are very likely a product of this process, which is also why the outer surfaces of the casing stones are bulging and somewhat rounded. They probably had sacks on the front edges of the forms which had one, two, or three outlets near the bottom so as to allow the excess water in the stone mixture to drain out when the mixture was being stamped down from the top, (the stamping process just as described by Professor Davidovits). It's not difficult to imagine something like screen-socks sewn onto two or three holes at the bottom of a sackcloth, attached to the front of the form, which would have worked like screens only allowing water to seep through, especially with a flat plate, (wood?), placed in the end of a sock that was only three to five inches long hanging out from the bottom of the sack. These remaining red granite casing stones on the third pyramid are said by most to have been left unfinished, (which may or may not be true because they may have been left that way intentionally). The flat-finished portion around the modern entrance here was finished by Pharaoh Menkaure who hijacked this pyramid to use it (apparently) for his own tomb.

See the protrusions or "knobs" at the bottom of the stones just above the group of tourists entering and exiting the pyramid? The knobs are all over the lower third of this pyramid on what remains of the red granite casing stones. Notice the large ones below are flat on the front, as if like I said above, there were sock-screens with flat plates in them attached to the bottom front portion of the forms.

The same technology made its way to the Americas and apparently lasted all the way into the time of the Incas:

Enigmas Regarding The Third Pyramid Of Giza In Egypt: So Called Menkaure - Hidden Inca Tours

Often overlooked because of its small stature, the co called Menkaure pyramid at Giza is as intriguing as its better known giant neighbours. But why is it so much smaller? Here is a quote from National Geographic: ‘Perhaps there wasn’t enough room left at the Giza Plateau. Maybe the cost of...

hiddenincatours.com

These stones in the above image file are very tightly fit together and some of them are even interlocking, as well as having the outward bulge and the knobs at the bottoms of them: they also were poured in situ, poured into place. The same thing may also be seen at many other locations like the Megalithic stone wall at Saksaywaman, (also Peru), and other places.

You may be able to see in this image file below, from Saksaywaman, that it appears the stones have been worked on the surface to flatten them out somewhat, the faces have wide vertical grooves like scoop marks made by using a harder stone to scrape away surface material, (just as the Egyptians used diorite balls for shaping stone, which may be found, and the work seen, at the ancient Aswan quarry where there is still a giant broken obelisk laying abandoned in situ). Note also in the file below that it sure looks like several of the stones have had the drainage knobs simply broken off at the bottom.

I don't know where this next one is from but probably South America.

Archeologists expect everyone to believe these knobs are for lifting these megalithic stones, (ridiculous).

Actually no. Years ago, there was a French geologist and chemist as I recall. He took a small bit of casement stone and smuggled it out of Egypt so he could examine it under an electron microscope. Turns out that there is a tiny crystal that forms in cement but not in natural limestone.

Anyway, the Geologist/Chemist/Professor ultimately had a bunch of grad students help him with the process I described above. He actually made a video about the research, the process and the results; complete with the line of students filing by with their straw baskets filled with the cement mixture and him on a platform of some sort, with tamping pole in hand. If memory serves, he also returned the casement shard to Egypt.

Thanks for the photos and links. Great post! I'll follow up after a ton of sleep. It's been a long one.

daq · May 8, 2024

Yahudim said:
Actually no. Years ago, there was a French geologist and chemist as I recall. He took a small bit of casement stone and smuggled it out of Egypt so he could examine it under an electron microscope. Turns out that there is a tiny crystal that forms in cement but not in natural limestone.

Anyway, the Geologist/Chemist/Professor ultimately had a bunch of grad students help him with the process I described above. He actually made a video about the research, the process and the results; complete with the line of students filing by with their straw baskets filled with the cement mixture and him on a platform of some sort, with tamping pole in hand. If memory serves, he also returned the casement shard to Egypt.

Thanks for the photos and links. Great post! I'll follow up after a ton of sleep. It's been a long one.

Ah, so you must have read him previously, years ago, for that is the story of Joseph Davidovits: he is the same French geologist, chemist, and materials scientist you are referring to, the same one who more recently founded the Geopolymer Institute, (much of what you have said is buried in other pages of the site I linked).

Have a good rest, friend, shalom.

Yahudim · May 9, 2024

daq said:
Ah, so you must have read him previously, years ago, for that is the story of Joseph Davidovits: he is the same French geologist, chemist, and materials scientist you are referring to, the same one who more recently founded the Geopolymer Institute, (much of what you have said is buried in other pages of the site I linked).

Have a good rest, friend, shalom.

I feel better now but have another long day ahead.

Btw, I love the site. It is a straight forward approach to a virtual Minoan Labyrinth married to a menu system reminiscent of a Hellen Keller rally race. I occasionally would break for the odd Joseph Davidovits YouTube vid. to keep from getting too frustrated.

But I'll keep digging, even if it has to be later.

Thanks again for wading through all this material. I would be lost.

daq · May 12, 2024

Hence the loss of forest due to worthless greed

Genesis 7:4
[04] For yet seven yamim I bring rain upon the eretz, forty yom and forty laylah, and I will wipe away from the face of the adamah every standing thing which I have made.

Thus Noah knew that all the trees of Eden would be destroyed by the flood and cast down into the abyss. The so-called Khufu Solar Barge wasn't built by Khufu because when they tested the wood for age they found that it was already approximately six to seven thousand years old at the time when it was cut down to make the Ark, and that time when the trees were cut down to make the Ark was moreover about six thousand ago at this point in time, (about twelve thousand years total).

(Public Domain)

The Khufu Solar Barge is a full-size intact vessel from Ancient Egypt that was buried and sealed in a boat pit at the foot of the Great Pyramid, (south side). The ship has now been reconstructed and was just recently moved to the Grand Egyptian Museum. It is one of the oldest, largest, and best preserved vessels from antiquity. Its measures are 43.6m long, (143ft), and 5.9m wide, (19.35ft). It is counted as the world's oldest intact ship and is described as a masterpiece of woodcraft that could sail today if put into water.

The vessel however may not have been designed for sailing because there is no rigging, nor for paddling, for there is no room, (clearly it is symbolic though it does show signs of having been put into water at least once). The ship was one of two rediscovered in 1954, by Kamal el-Mallakh, undisturbed since it was first buried and sealed in the boat pit carved out of the Giza bedrock at the southern base of the Great Pyramid.

The ship was built primarily with Lebanon Cedar planking while using unpegged tenons made of Christ's Thorn, that is, Shiyttim, more commonly known as Acacia. It was built with a flat bottom composed of several planks, but no actual keel, the planks and frames being lashed together with Halfah grass, and was reconstructed from 1,224 pieces which were found in the boat pit, laid out in a logical disassembled order within the pit, on the south side of the Great Pyramid.

Wikimedia: Cheops Solar Ship

Note the vertical and horizontal construction laps on the sides of the cabin: the outside of the cabin is divided into five horizontal sections by four vertical laps, (fives cubit symbolism for horizontal measurements?), and it is likewise divided into three vertical levels by two horizontal laps running length-wise, (symbolism for three levels).

Horizontal Length of the Ship:
m = meters
B = British Inches
א = Aish Cubits (17.50ב)
ב = Thumbs

43.6m = 143.0446ft = 1716.5352B (12×143.0446)
1716.5352B×1.0188 = 1748.8060ב

So then, after almost 6000 years laying disassembled and buried in a boat pit, in the desert heat, at the base of the Great Pyramid on the south side, and now having been reassembled in modern times: this ship is a mere one thumb shy of being exactly 100א, (Aish Cubits). However this depends on how accurate the measurement of 43.6 meters is meant to be: the decimal, (.6), may be just a close approximation, (as it appears), and thus it may actually be exactly 100א in horizontal length, moreover the wood may have easily shrank by a mere inch dispersed overall which, after nearly 6000 years, would still yet be all the more incredible. Either way there should be no doubt that the original intended length of the so-called Khufu Solar Barge was 100א.

The difference in meters would be from 43.6m to 43.6297m.

43.6297m = 1717.7072B
1717.7072B×1.0188 (the conversion ratio to thumbs) = 1750.00ב
100×17.50 = 1750.00 = 100א

The question really should be this: what is the 17.50ב Aish Cubit doing here in this measurement? If indeed this Ark was built by the second Pharaoh of the Fourth Dynasty of the Old Kingdom of Egypt, then shouldn't we be finding here the 28 finger Royal Cubit of the Egyptians? Surely Pharaoh's own Solar Barge would have been measured and constructed using the Egyptian Royal Cubit, right? Let the reader decide whether this Ark was built by the Fourth Dynasty Khufu of modern Egyptology or whether it was built by the same one who built the Great Pyramid: but one thing is sure, it is symbolic, and if it was built by the architect and builder of the Great Pyramid then this strongly implies that the whole flood narrative in Breshiyt-Genesis is full of supernal-spiritual symbolism and meaning. There is no way two and seven of every kind would fit into this Ark but keep in mind that the cabin, (as shown in the image file above), is symbolically divided into three levels, as per the lap-siding along the outer sides of the cabin: and in the ancient mind 100 cubits threefold, that is, three levels, may well be considered three hundred cubits. Moreover, if the Ark of Noah is intended to be understood in this manner, then its horizontal length matches that of the court of the Mishkan Tabernacle shown to Mosheh: and the Mishkan also, somewhat mysteriously, has three coverings which no doubt contain supernal meaning.

And again, concerning this Ark, researchers have now concluded that the wood used to build it was between six and seven thousand years old before it was even cut: meaning that the wood itself would now be somewhere between eleven and twelve thousand years old. This may sound incredible but the timing fits perfectly with the Septuagint chronology if we count the six days of creation as thousand-year days. If the researchers are correct then the wood for this Ark may have been taken from the Biblical Qedem of olam past, that is, right next to Eden, and Qedem is most likely the area of the Giza Plateau, wherein also the city of Henok was built.

In this manner of understanding the Septuagint chronology Henok is born from above at the end of the seventh one thousand-year period, (a yom gadol), and from there it is one thousand years to the four hundredth and eightieth year of Noah, and then comes the immersion of Noah, the flood, one hundred and twenty years after that. And this 1120 years from Henok to the flood is also marked in the descending passage chronograph of the Great Pyramid, from the entrance door to one of the points of intersection with the first ascending passage.

This places the seeding of these trees which were used to build the Ark at the beginning of the third yom gadol, the third one thousand year day in the Biblical creation narrative, that is, the third great thousand-year day of the opening creation account: for a yom may be any increment of time depending on the context, and may also be meant in multiple ways in the same statement, whether an hour, a day, a year, or a thousand years, for Yom is Light, (Gen 1:5a).

Cedars of Lebanon that would today be about twelve thousand years old were cut down to build this Ark.

Ezekiel 31:16-18
16 I have caused the nations to shake at the sound of his fall, in My causing him to go down to Sheol with those going down to the pit: and all trees of Eden are comforted in the nether parts of the earth, the choice and good of Lebanon, all water drinking trees.
17 Those with him have also gone down to Sheol with those pierced by the sword, and his strength, those that dwelt in his shade in the midst of nations.
18 To whom have you been thus like in glory and in greatness among the trees of Eden? And you have been brought down with the trees of Eden to the nether parts of the earth: you lie in the midst of the uncircumcised, with the pierced of the sword. This is Pharaoh and all his multitude, an oracle of Adonai YHWH.

daq · May 12, 2024

Are u saying that mitzraim was built by cain?

I am saying that one named Henok built a city and called it after the name of his son, Henok. I am saying that some of those named in Gen 4 are named again in Gen 5 after they were born from above and became grafted in members of the holy seed line by way of preaching, as the scripture says, men began to herald the Name of HE WHO IS in the days of Enosh, (Gen 4:26), and Enosh being considered the first Herald or Preacher of Righteousness also makes Noah the eighth Preacher of Righteousness, as the scripture also says, (2Pet 2:5).

Henok therefore built a city and married the city: sound familiar? And the name of the wife of Henok is Ednah, which is the feminine form of Eden, thus, Edenah. And as we know by the teachings of Paul, (Gal 4:22-27), the women are the cities are an allegory of the covenants. In the Book of Jubilees the wives of Enoch, Methuselah, and Terah are all named the same, Ednah or Edenah, and in the Book of Tobit the wife of Reuel/Raguel is also named Ednah or Edenah.

In Sefer Henok, Reuel/Raguel is one of the seven holy Malakim who watch. In the Torah, Reuel/Raguel is the Kohen-Priest of Midian who has seven daughters, one of whom Mosheh marries, (Tzipporah, like a little birdie, spirit, and therefore doctrine). Reuel or Raguel means "Friend of El", while his surname is Yithrow, which is not a name but a title of respect, meaning something like "His Excellency", and thus Yithrow Reuel/Raguel means, essentially, "His Excellency, Friend of El".

It is from these ancient things that the allegory of Yerushalem of Above is derived, the wife of the Most High, who is our mother covenant according to Paul in Gal 4:26. And who then is the bride/wife of the Lamb in the Apocalypse? She is New Yerushalem, (Rev 21:2), that is, the Daughter of Zion-Yerushalem: for the Master already has the New-Renewed covenant as he enters into Yerushalem on the foal/colt of a donkey, as it is written in Zec 9:9, which is quoted as being fulfilled in Mat 21:1-9, (specifically Mat 21:4-5). Moreover John 3:27-36 bears the truth that the Master is the Groom and was given the Testimony of the New-Renewed Covenant from the heavens, (Jhn 3:27, where "from the heavens" no doubt means from the Father).

So just as the Lamb marries a city in the Apocalypse, New Yerushalem, so also Henok marries a city, Edenah, the primordial holy city of above, which is allegorical language for covenants: for the women are the cities are an allegory of the covenants. Therefore Henok built the first city according to what he read and understood from the heavenly tablets, written by Adam after he was born from above and lived, (and only then is he said to have lived 930 years, and likewise all those of the Gen 5 "Lamb's Book of of Life" are stated to have lived, but none of those in Gen 4).

The City of Henok is the story of the beginning, (and of Eden), written in stone on the Gizeh Plateau.

With that said, I would like to say to my own mother, Happy Mother's Day, Mom!

And the same to any other moms who may happen to chance upon this thread later today/tomorrow.

The City of Henok

Messianic

Messianic

Y'shua HaMoshiach Messianic

Y'shua HaMoshiach Messianic

Abarim Publications Theological Dictionary​

Active Member

Active Member

Messianic

Y'shua HaMoshiach Messianic

Y'shua HaMoshiach Messianic

Messianic

Messianic

Messianic

Messianic

Y'shua HaMoshiach Messianic

Messianic

Y'shua HaMoshiach Messianic

Messianic

Y'shua HaMoshiach Messianic

Messianic

Messianic

Similar threads

Abarim Publications Theological Dictionary