# Thread: The Delusional Numerology of Alexander Marcussen

1. Senior Member
Join Date
Jun 2007
Location
Enschede / Netherlands
Posts
2,622
Originally Posted by sylvius

flesh = Hebrew "basar" -- which (here) denotes the male organ.
which doesn't fit with Rashi's comment that Adam sought to ease his sexual drive with all animals, but didn't find satisfaction until he found Eve.

Rashi on Genesis 2:23,
This one this time: This teaches us that Adam came to all the animals and the beasts [in search of a mate], but he was not satisfied until he found Eve. [from Yev. 63a]
which brought me to the idea that he tad homosexual relations with the snake.

2. Originally Posted by Desmild
And we can add the Triangular orders of Tri(73) to get "Seven Seven Seven" by the way.

Tri(73) = 3XTri(36) + Tri(37)

3X36 + 37 = 145 = 39 "Seven" (Heb ord) + 41 "seven" (Gr ord) + 65 "Seven" (Eng ord)
Excellent! That's a perfect example of why I say that your numerology is completely meaningless and absurd. You could find, or rather create, patterns like that with any random set of words because each word has so many values for you to choose from. How is it possible you can't see this obvious fact? Why do you refuse to even discuss it? This is the fundamental error of your method.

And your pattern isn't even correct because you ignored the fact that 3 = T(2) so if you were following the rule to replace the triangular numbers in Gen 1:1 = T(2) x T(36) + T(37) with their "triangular orders" you should have written

2 x 36 + 37 = 109 and then played your foolish game with the number 109.

This exemplifies another problem with your method. You are free to make up any "pattern" you want to start with and then go looking for "connections" like in this example where you added up a cherry picked subset of the "triangular orders". If you can find a way to make it fit, then you declare it is a "code" designed by God. If you can't make it fit, then you simply ignore it. This is the textbook definition of CONFIRMATION BIAS and it is why no person with any brains would believe your claims. They are based on fundamental COGNITIVE ERRORS of selection bias and confirmation bias. You cannot answer this point because you know it is true.

Originally Posted by Desmild
And Richard, how many times do I have to tell you that you don't have any proof while I have all the proof.
Back off. You are intellectually defeated here. There is no logical explanation of why these integration and verses hits with such meaning all the way without God.
Calling this "random" is not valid but rather self deception.
You keep saying that you have proof but you never actually show it. All you do is repeat the same errors that I have proven to be errors and then declare you have answered when in fact you have not.

You know you cannot answer so you don't even try.

Here again is the question you must answer: How do you tell the difference between your numerology and the random meaningless "connections" that we ALWAYS can find in any random text?

Or to put it another way: Why would anyone think there is any meaning to your patterns?

You need to answer this question.

I do not merely "call" your numerology random. I have explained why it is random in extreme detail and you simply ignore what I've written.

Originally Posted by Desmild
Maybe you will find some guys here that are like you, but there are plenty like me who will see what God is doing here. You can never change that fact.
Anybody who is able to rationally analyse your claims will come to the same conclusion. They are meaningless because they are exactly what we would expect from a random set of words and numbers. You know you cannot answer this point.

Originally Posted by Desmild
117 = "Seven Hundred Seventy and Seven" (Eng red) = "Seven Seven Seven" (Heb ord) = "The Seal of God" (Eng ord)
68 = "Seven Hundred Seventy and Seven" (Heb red)
There you go again, repeating the same error. You had to use different phrases and different systems of gematria to make that connection. How many possible combinations did you choose from? Probably hundreds. So you found three connections in a set with hundreds of random numbers? Why would anyone think there is any meaning to that?

Here's the key to it all. You IMAGINE that your patterns are "statistically unlikely" and so could not have happened "by chance." That's your error. They are exactly what we would expect from random chance and you have no way to prove your belief so you simply declare it as a "fact" and then call anyone who disagrees "blind" no matter how much evidence they present.

You are finger painting with random numbers my friend. There is not one mathematician on the planet who could fail to see the errors of your method.

Great chatting!

Richard

3. Originally Posted by Desmild
But then I went into the forum of this webiste and read a post from gambini that talked about the fine-structure constant and Pi down to 5 digits of Genesis 1:1
This is where everything changed for me.
Did you know that Gambini bases his patterns by counting 2 as the first prime? He has MOUNTAINS of patterns based on 2 as the first prime and he thinks his patterns prove the Bible, just like you, but his patterns are contrary to yours. Take a look at his site Mathematical Monotheism.

This is the key to your freedom. You can review his numerology and see it is very much like yours but he comes to CONTRARY CONCLUSIONS. This really helped me free myself from my delusions about the Bible Wheel and other patterns I thought proved the Bible. The key is to compare your patterns with contrary patterns found by other believers. Then you will be able to see that they all are based on similar errors. And your mind will be free!

I wrote a couple articles about this on my blog: The Bible Wheel: Patternicity on Steroids and Battle of the Bible Wheels: Protestant vs. Catholic.

4. Originally Posted by sylvius
Originally Posted by Richard Amiel McGough
I used to own that book. It played an important role in getting me hooked on numerology, which in turn helped me fall into the delusion of Christianity. I used to joke that I was the only person that Aleister Crowley brought to Christ. But then I burned it after becoming a Christian because Crowley was a self-proclaimed Satanist.
That's quite a confession
Yeah. It was something I didn't mention back in the day when I was trying to convince other Christians that God used gematria in designing the Bible.

5. Senior Member
Join Date
Jun 2007
Location
Enschede / Netherlands
Posts
2,622
Originally Posted by Richard Amiel McGough
Yeah. It was something I didn't mention back in the day when I was trying to convince other Christians that God used gematria in designing the Bible.
I bought the book "777 (...)" this year because Desmild mentioned it.

Never heard of it before.

I like the book

Crowley also mentions 233 = "etz hachayim" , tree of life, and also 932 = "etz hada'at tov vara", tree of the knowledge of good and evil, and also 5 = "ed", mist, vapour.

these are the numbers stressed by the one (Friedrich Weinreb) through whom I rolled into it.

6. Originally Posted by sylvius
I bought the book "777 (...)" this year because Desmild mentioned it.

Never heard of it before.

I like the book

Crowley also mentions 233 = "etz hachayim" , tree of life, and also 932 = "etz hada'at tov vara", tree of the knowledge of good and evil, and also 5 = "ed", mist, vapour.

these are the numbers stressed by the one (Friedrich Weinreb) through whom I rolled into it.
Yeah, I think that's when I first noticed the relation

The Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil = 4 x The Tree of Life

I later saw that as an example of the meaning of the number 4 as "door" and the two "universal doors" in and out of this world (birth and death) and connected this with Genesis 4 where the first birth (yld = 44) and death are recorded. Also blood (dm = 44) first appears too. Thought it was a pretty good set of connections ... but other numerologists make up their own connections. So now I doubt there is any meaning to any of it.

7. Senior Member
Join Date
Jun 2007
Location
Enschede / Netherlands
Posts
2,622
Originally Posted by sylvius
which doesn't fit with Rashi's comment that Adam sought to ease his sexual drive with all animals, but didn't find satisfaction until he found Eve.

Rashi on Genesis 2:23,

which brought me to the idea that he had homosexual relations with the snake.
Revelation 20 identifies the snake of paradise as the satan.

The snake of Genesis is presented in a play on the words "arumim" עֲרוּמִּ֔ים = naked (Genesis 2:25, and both of them were naked, the man and his wife)

and "arum" עָר֔וּם= shrewd, cunning ( Genesis 3:1, And the snake was cunning, more than any beast of the field)

fits well with William Blake's Satan

http://www.blakearchive.org/images/b...1.1.wc.300.jpg

"arum"= 316

same as of the name Yeshu = Jesus

(i learned from A. Crowley )
Last edited by sylvius; 07-17-2019 at 10:15 AM.

8. Originally Posted by sylvius
Revelation 20 identifies the snake of paradise as the satan.

The snake of Genesis is presented in a play on the words "arumim" עֲרוּמִּ֔ים = naked (Genesis 2:25, and both of them were naked, the man and his wife)

and "arum" עָר֔וּם= shrewd, cunning ( Genesis 3:1, And the snake was cunning, more than any beast of the field)

fits well with William Blake's Satan
Yeah, I've been aware of that connection for a long time. Looks like it was intended by the author.

Originally Posted by sylvius
"arum"= 316

same as of the name Yeshu = Jesus

(i learned from A. Crowley )
Was that really his name? Some say that some anti-Christian Jews removed some letters so it forms an insult. I don't know if that's true. Here's what the wiki says:

Another explanation given is that the name "Yeshu" is actually an acronym for the formula (ימח שמו וזכרו(נו (Y'mach Sh'mo V'Zichro(no)), meaning "may his name and memory be obliterated". The earliest known example of this theory comes from medieval Toledot Yeshu narratives.[9][10] This has led to the accusation, first voiced by the anti-Judaist writer Johann Andreas Eisenmenger in his Entdecktes Judenthum, that "Yeshu" was always such a deliberately insulting term for Jesus.[11] Eisenmenger claimed that Jews believed that they were forbidden to mention names of false gods and instead were commanded to change and defame them and did so with Jesus' name as they considered him a false god. He argued that Jesus' original name was "Yeshua" and as Jews did not recognize him as saviour (moshia`) or that he had even saved (hoshia`) himself, they left out the ayin from the root meaning "to save".[11] Eisenmenger's book against Judaism was denounced by the Jews as malicious libel, and was the subject of a number of refutations.[12]

When I was a believer I was convinced that his name should be spelled as the standard "Yehoshua" = 391 = Salvation.

9. Senior Member
Join Date
Jun 2007
Location
Enschede / Netherlands
Posts
2,622
Originally Posted by Richard Amiel McGough
Yeah, I've been aware of that connection for a long time. Looks like it was intended by the author.

Was that really his name? Some say that some anti-Christian Jews removed some letters so it forms an insult. I don't know if that's true. Here's what the wiki says:

.
A. Crowley mentioned it. along with Yehoshuh = 326 , = Tetragrammaton + letter "shin'"

Yeshu Hanotzri has gematria 671 = 666 + 5

I heard from a Jewish cello-player "Jesus is the beast with seven heads and ten horns"

"Yeshu Notzri" being written with seven letters, that show in total ten horns (or legs) -- "shin" has three horns; "tzade " two horns, and the rest each one horn.

10. Originally Posted by sylvius
A. Crowley mentioned it. along with Yehoshuh = 326 , = Tetragrammaton + letter "shin'"

Yeshu Hanotzri has gematria 671 = 666 + 5

I heard from a Jewish cello-player "Jesus is the beast with seven heads and ten horns"

"Yeshu Notzri" being written with seven letters, that show in total ten horns (or legs) -- "shin" has three horns; "tzade " two horns, and the rest each one horn.
Just goes to show how people can make up anything to fit their preconceived opinions, eh?

There are currently 9 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 9 guests)

#### Posting Permissions

• You may not post new threads
• You may post replies
• You may not post attachments
• You may edit your posts
•