AUTHENTIC CHRISTIANITY

But become makers of the message - and not just hearers misleading yourselves For if anyone is a hearer of the message and not a maker he is like a man assessing the face of his 'Genesis' in a mirror [Jm.1:22-23]

Please note: Strict implementation of HTML prohibits the display of 8-bit Greek characters from the 'Symbol' font, as still used on this site to display unaccented Greek characters. Users of Internet Explorer should expect no problems but users of Firefox 3.x may need to install the 'Web Page Fixer +' add-on available here or here before the Greek text will display as intended.

If you find this website to be of some interest then you may also like to read:   Why Call Me God? : The Gospel Seen with a Single Eye   published by Capabel Press in September 2009. The book explains the ancient 'mystery' concealed behind the text of the gospels at the time they were first composed. The riddles of Greek scripture are soon unravelled to expose the devastating plot which must have been familiar to the Gnostic authors. Analysis then shows that the deeply challenging message of the gospels is not what the Christian churches say. It is something very different… and now explained in this groundbreaking book. For details, please click here

ISBN: 978 0 9562057 0 4

Chapter 6 : Significance of 'Bread' and 'Fish'

Copyright Notice
As the basis for my work I have used the Nestlé-Aland 26th Edition Greek text. Copyright on this is reserved as follows :
..... Novum Testamentum Graece, Nestlé-Aland 26th edition (c)1979, Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, Stuttgart;
..... The Greek New Testament, 3rd edition (c) 1975, United Bible Societies, London
This is the Greek text underlying most modern English translations since 1881, including the New American Standard and New International Versions. Certain words within the Nestlé text proper are enclosed in square brackets [ ] or double brackets [[ ]]. These reflect those places where the critical text editors consider the inclusion or omission of such text to be in question.
This text is only available for NON-COMMERCIAL personal/scholarly and educational use.

I have also used the CATSS LXX editions of the Septuagint Old Testament prepared by the TLG (Thesaurus Linguae Graecae) Project directed by T. Brunner at the University of California, Irvine and made available through the Center for Computer Analysis of Texts (CCAT) at the University of Pennsylvania 'for the use of students, teachers and scholars in study and education contexts'.
This text is only available for NON-COMMERCIAL personal/scholarly and educational use.

Unless otherwise noted, the remainder of what is presented in this document is my original work. Copyright on this is reserved as follows :
..... Authentic Christianity, 4th edition : (c) 2001 - 2004, Target Technical, York, UK
All rights are reserved - except that this text is made available without charge for NON-COMMERCIAL personal/scholarly and educational use.

6.1 Introduction
It was in St. Peter's Square in Rome on the Feast of the Epiphany, 6th January 2001, that the bishop of Rome, John Paul II, signed the document titled 'Novo Millennio Ineunte' (Entering the New Millennium). I quote the first paragraph from the abridgement published in 'The Tablet' [13 Jan 2001] :

Now it was around two weeks later [23 Jan 2001] that, pondering certain anomalies in the Greek text of the gospels, I realised that there was a concealed component to the message. At first I was uncertain quite what was concealed and how. But a little over one year later, knowing a good deal more, I was able to write up an analysis (see Chapter 3) of the six stories of the 'Feeding of the 5000/4000' which served to identify what was meant in the synoptic gospels by the 'shorthand' terms 'bread' ['as'] and 'fish' ['cq']. I think the scriptural authors themselves might have preferred to put it like this. Spiritually the digram 'as' is 'bread' - and spiritually 'cq' is 'a fish'. By this they would think of a convention established for their use (and of course for informed readers).

And if you think such use of implicit digrams improbable, take a look at Prof. Bruce Metzger's book 'Maunuscripts of the Greek Bible' [Ref.1]. On p.36 he lists the several explicit digrams and trigrams known to be employed in Greek scripture of the early centuries CE - called by Ludwig Traube 'Nomina Sacra'. A word such as 'pneuma' (spirit) was contracted using the first two letters in conjunction with the last - thus 'pna'. A scribe was always likely to be familiar with letter sequences because in Greek it is the rule, with very few exceptions, that words can terminate only in a vowel, a diphthong, or one of three consonants, n, r and V - and it was the scribe's task to divide the words appropriately at the end of each line of text [Ref.2].

Now I realised that the stories in the three synoptic gospels of 'the salt losing its saltiness and thereby obtaining breadiness' appeared to confirm the identity of the 'bread' as 'as'. This strengthened my conviction that the term 'fish' was also a reference to the textual component 'cq'. Then the right place to 'throw out the net' was into the text itself !

I knew too that in the gospel of John Chapter 6 (Feeding of the 5000) the word used for the 'fish' was 'oyarion' (whereas in the synoptics it is 'icqus') - and that this defined an alternate 'Johannine' kind of 'fish'. Then in John Chapter 21 both terms are used (three times each) - so linking the two variants. I strongly suspected that the 'shorthand' for a Johannine 'fish' was simply 'y', a native double character ('ps') in the Greek alphabet - and the least used character (0.14%) in the New Testament canon. It was also the character associated with the Greek words 'yeudhs' (false) and 'yeusths' (liar), consistent with the scriptural concept that 'o ecqros' (the enemy) is also 'o planos' (the deceiver).

The Concise Oxford (English) Dictionary defines the adjective fishy as follows ...

Abounding in fish

Like fish's eye, etc

Smelling or tasting like fish

Consisting of fish

Of dubious character; questionable

At this point I felt that I could 'catch' all the 'fish' with no difficulty. I was very doubtful whether the author of the document 'Novo Millennio Ineunte' had actually known himself what it was to 'catch fish' in this way. But I had tried to do what was asked - and had been met with what looked like success. So perhaps this was a reward for dumb obedience. Sometimes things can work like that.

But if this was a valid result, who else knew? I made a few enquiries and could find no one who recognised what I was talking about.

In my work as a technical inventor I have several times been in the situation (applying for patent protection on a novel concept or device) where I have indeed derived and known something significant which (at the time) no one else knew. Had this happened again - but this time over interpretation of the gospels?

But it was not just that I had perhaps identified the 'bread' and the 'fish'. Others who were kind enough to read my draft of Chapter 3 expressed themselves puzzled by the significance (if any) of such a strange result. But perhaps I had worked out what was the significance of the 'bread' and the 'fish' ? And if I was right then it seemed that the Christian church must have lost this vital knowledge at some point early in its history.

6.2 Tokens of Evil
In Chapter 3 I have derived the identification of the shorthand 'bread' ['as'] and 'fish' ['cq'] which have been 'concealed' by the authors within the texts of the synoptic gospels. Now I shall set out my understanding of the significance attributable to these entities.

The entry for satan in the Concise Oxford (English) Dictionary goes as follows :

The Devil; Lucifer [late Latin, from Greek, from Hebrew 'satan' = enemy]

Now the entry for satan in the Oxford Pocket Greek Dictionary gives us :

satanas

- whilst the entry for enemy gives us :

ecqros

So the Hebrew word for ENEMY becomes in Greek satanas

- it is almost a palindrome

- it has shorthand 'bread' ['as'] at the end of the word.

- it has shorthand 'bread' reversed ['sa'] at the beginning of the word.

Whereas the Greek word for ENEMY is ecqros

- and it has shorthand 'fish' ['cq'] in the middle of the word.

So there you have the link - both 'bread' ['as'] and 'fish' ['cq'] taking a rôle in the text as 'tokens of evil' - from LXX 'Genesis' (the first book of the Old Testament) right through to the 'Apocalypse' (the last book of the New Testament). Such a scheme must date back to at least 250BCE (the approximate date of the the translation of the Old Testament from Hebrew to the LXX Greek).

Moreover there is a link between artemis (Artemis) and artos (bread). For Artemis was a major feature on the religious scene in antiquity, a pagan mother goddess, an ever present challenge and threat to the traditional Jewish faith(s)? On this basis also, 'bread' is a 'token of evil', for the two words for 'Artemis' and for 'bread' share the first syllable - as they share the 'first and last' characters 'as'. This link unfolds with the LXX rendering of the 'ortugomhtra' (quail mothers) in the story at Exodus 16:13. For this too was food for the Israelites - but the term used is known to refer to the goddess Artemis.

But if this is what the authors of scripture have seen fit to do, then the realisation of it may be highly disconcerting to those established in conventional Christianity of the 21st century. For it seems suddenly clear that those 'works of satan' which at our baptism/ confirmation we undertake so lightly to 'reject' may be thick within the texts of the gospels themselves. This can come as a very considerable surprise. For we were never told!

And then comes the question : 'Why were we never told?'

Well, I think that in the present age there can be just one answer to this : 'No teacher can teach what he/she does not know'.

Remember that Hebrew (like Arabic) is written 'right to left'. Then, in summary, we have :
natas <- = enemy (Hebrew, read R->L - but in Greek script, vowels inserted)
satan -> (reversed, now read L->R)
satanas = satan (Greek)
ecqros = enemy (Greek)
icqus = fish (Greek)
artos = bread (Greek)
sarx = flesh (Greek)

'...as...' = "bread" [ 201 ]
'...cq...' = "fish" [ 609 ]
'...sa...' = "flesh" ? [ 201]
'...x... [ 60 ]

So at Mt.14:17,19; Mt.15:36; Mk.6:38,41; Lk.9:16, we get what we might lightly term 'sardines on toast' :

Now perhaps we can see why 'Not All Food is Wholesome' [see story at Pr.23:1-9]

For 'food' (eg. bread; fish) is in the text itself - and it may not be what at first it seems.

The prophet Ezekiel is commanded : To 'eat the scroll' and - 'it was 'in my mouth like sweet honey' [Ezk.2:9-3:7 seq]

In Revelation, we have : 'It was like honey for sweetness' - but, when I had eaten it, 'my belly was made bitter' [Rv.10:10].

And in the Book of Proverbs we have : 'But you will vomit it up' [Pr.23:8]

6.3 'Big fish' as well
In the last chapter of John's gospel is the only explicit reference in the New Testament to 'big fish' :
43N 21 11 anebh oun simwn petros kai eilkusen to diktuon eis thn ghn meston icquwn megalwn ekaton penthkonta triwn kai tosoutwn ontwn ouk escisqh to diktuon
43N 21 11 Then Simon Peter went up, and drew the net to the land, filled with one hundred and fifty three big fish. And being so many, the net was not torn.

Q. Now if a 'fish' is a token of evil, what is a 'big fish'?
A. It is a variant kind of 'fish', an instance of the digram 'cq' in which one or more other characters have been inserted to 'fatten' the 'fish' - by 'tearing it apart'. In the example above you can see an ordinary 'fish' - and also a 'big fish' located within the word escisqh (it was torn). Can you see it?

Incidentally, it is perhaps significant that the ariqmos (number) value of both 'rebekka' ('Rebecca', who takes the curse upon herself at Gn.27:13) and 'h magdalhnh' ('The Magdalene', twelve times mentioned as such in the four gospels) = 9 x 17 = 153. This may well suggest that both are 'big fish' - in a metaphorical sense of the term.

We get another example of a 'big fish' tossed at us here - at Acts 28:27 (part of the quote from Isaiah 6) :
44N 28 27 epacunqh gar h kardia tou laou toutou kai tois wsin barews hkousan kai tous ofqalmous autwn ekammusan mhpote idwsin tois ofqalmois kai tois wsin akouswsin kai th kardia sunwsin kai epistreywsin kai iasomai autous
44N 28 27 For the heart of this people has grown fat. And with their ears they heard heavily and they half-closed their eyes - lest they perceive with the eyes and hear with the ears - and understand with their heart - and turn back - and I should heal them' [Is.6:10]
Q. Do you see the 'big fish' - located within the word epacunqh - which means 'it has grown fat'? Were the authors of scripture not rather clever with the textual constructs which they adopted?

Here is the source from Isaiah - identical in the LXX text :
23O 6 10 epacunqh gar h kardia tou laou toutou kai tois wsin autwn barews hkousan kai tous ofqalmous autwn ekammusan mhpote idwsin tois ofqalmois kai tois wsin akouswsin kai th kardia sunwsin kai epistreywsin kai iasomai autous
23O 6 10 For the heart of this people has grown fat. And with their ears they heard heavily, and they half-closed their eyes - lest they perceive with the eyes and hear with the ears - and understand with their heart - and turn back - and I should heal them.
Q. So this is not a 'scribal technique' which originates in the 'New Testament' - but much earlier within the 'Old Testament' texts?

And the word epacunqh is used again later in Isaiah :
23O 34 6 h macaira kuriou eneplhsqh aimatos epacunqh apo steatos arnwn kai apo steatos tragwn kai kriwn oti qusia kuriw en bosor kai sfagh megalh en th idoumaia
23O 34 6 The dagger of 'the lord' is filled with blood. It has grown fat from (the) fat of lambs, from the fat of goats and of rams. For (there was) a sacrifice by 'the lord' in Bosor and a great slaughter in Idoumaia (the land of Edom? : if so, it refers to Esau at Gn.25:30; 36:8).
Q. Do you see the blood 'aima' filling the word for 'dagger' - and the word 'Idoumaia'?
The first part of the word 'Idoumaia' is in fact just the word 'idou' - meaning "Look !". And 'look' is certainly what the authors hope that you will do!

Q. Does scripture contain a 'concealed component'?

There are plenty more 'big fish' in the texts. The number of characters 'inserted' between 'c' and 'q' is variable.

6.4 Significance of where the 'fish' are located
There are 177 'synoptic fish' ['cq'] within the canon of the Greek New Testament. Of these, 97 are in the four gospels. For those who do not have the means to locate them quickly, here is a list of the verses where they can be found.

Table 1

Clearly a commentary on all of these would run to some length. In this chapter I shall consider only those associated with the last recorded words of Jesus at the 'crucifixion' - just as an example to illustrate their potential significance.

Matthew (using Psalm 22 : quote here may be in Hebrew apart from 'sabacqani' which - as per Mark - is retained in Aramaic)
40N 27 46 peri de thn enathn wran anebohsen o ihsous fwnh megalh legwn hli hli lema sabacqani tout estin qee mou qee mou inati me egkatelipes
40N 27 46 But around the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice, saying "Eli, Eli, lema sabachthani" That is, "My God, my God, for what have you abandoned me?"

Mark (using Psalm 22 : quote here entirely in Aramaic)
41N 15 34 kai th enath wra ebohsen o ihsous fwnh megalh elwi elwi lema sabacqani o estin meqermhneuomenon o qeos mou o qeos mou eis ti egkatelipes me
41N 15 34 And at the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice "Eloi, Eloi, lema sabachthani". Which is interpreted "My God, my God, into what have you abandoned me?"

Psalm 22
19O 21 2 o qeos o qeos mou prosces moi ina ti egkatelipes me makran apo ths swthrias mou oi logoi twn paraptwmatwn mou
19O 21 2 God, my God, hold forth to me. For what have you abandoned me? The saying(s) of my transgressions (is) far from saving me.
19O 21 3 o qeos mou kekraxomai hmeras kai ouk eisakoush kai nuktos kai ouk eis anoian emoi
19O 21 3 My God, I have cried out by day and you will not pay attention, and by night - and for me (it is) not in folly.

Now it is interesting to note that the one word here which provides us with a 'fish' is the word retained (in Greek characters) by both the evangelists from the Aramaic version of Psalm 22 : 'sabacqani'. It may appear that both authors have gone to some trouble to include this unusual word. Did they do so specifically because it provided them with the opportunity to have the dying figure speak a 'fish' within his very last word? Then what does this tell us - seeing that 'cq' is inevitably reminiscent of 'o ecqros' (the enemy)?

And before I move on to look at the dying words of Jesus in the other gospels, do you see the name 'kai_n' spelled out in the second verse of Psalm 22? Remember that the gospel texts were inscribed with no spaces between words - so this would have been quite easy for readers of the LXX Psalms to spot in the Greek culture of 2000 years ago. And if you look carefully you may see that 'kain' can be found three times dispersed within this verse. Then do not forget what Cain says at Gn.4:14 : "I will be hidden from your face".

In fact the phrase 'hmeras kai nuktos' is also used extensively within the New Testament - for example five times in the Book of Revelation [Rv.4:8; 7:15; 12:10; 14:11; 20:10].

John
43N 19 28 meta touto eidws o ihsous oti hdh panta tetelestai ina teleiwqh h grafh legei diyw
43N 19 28 After this, Jesus, seeing that already everything was accomplished so that scripture might be fulfilled, said, "I thirst".

43N 19 29 skeuos ekeito oxous meston spoggon oun meston tou oxous usswpw periqentes proshnegkan autou tw stomati
43N 19 29 A vessel full of vinegar was there. Then, putting a sponge full of vinegar on hyssop, they brought it to his mouth.

43N 19 30 ote oun elaben to oxos [o] ihsous eipen tetelestai kai klinas thn kefalhn paredwken to pneuma
43N 19 30 Then when he took the vinegar, Jesus said "It has been accomplished" - and, bowing his head, he gave up the spirit.

We may notice the following :

1. The penultimate word spoken by the dying Jesus is 'diyw' (I thirst). As I mention in the Introduction [#6.1] above, I strongly suspect that the character 'y' may be known 'spiritually' as a 'Johannine fish', for it occurs in the word oyarion (a fish) which is used only in the gospel of John. If this is correct, then the dying Jesus is still 'speaking fish', just as in the gospels of Matthew and Mark. But this time the notion is adapted to the 'Johannine' environment.
   
   
2. The last word spoken is tetelestai (it has been accomplished). Here is the very last verse of the Book of Genesis :
   01O 50 26 kai eteleuthsen iwshf etwn ekaton deka kai eqayan auton kai eqhkan en th sorw en aiguptw
   01O 50 26 And Joseph accomplished one hundred and ten years - and they embalmed him and he was put in the coffin in Egypt.
   
   
3. The mention three times within two verses of 'oxos' (vinegar; sour wine) provides us with the wherewithal for the anagrammatic reconstruction of the phrase 'exakosioi exhkonta ex' (six hundred and sixty six) = 666. This is the 'number of the beast' as disclosed at Rv.13:18.
   
   
4. There is an interesting overlap with Gn.9:13-16 where we hear of a "sign (shmeion) of a covenant between 'me' and the earth". The 'sign' (also mentioned three times) is to toxon mou en th nefelh (the bow in the cloud). The words'oxos' and 'kefalhn' at Jn.19:30 are quasi-homophonic/ homonymic with the words 'toxon' and 'nefelh' at Gn.9:16 . Moreover, anagrammatic reconstruction yields 'exakosioi exhkonta ex' from these three verses of Genesis as well. I do not suppose that this is accidental - for many word games of this kind have their origin within the early chapters of Genesis.

Luke
42N 23 41 kai hmeis men dikaiws axia gar wn epraxamen apolambanomen outos de ouden atopon epraxen
42N 23 41 And we indeed justly, for we are receiving merit for what we have done, but this man has done nothing out of place".

42N 23 42 kai elegen ihsou mnhsqhti mou otan elqhs eis thn basileian sou
42N 23 42 And he said to Jesus, "Remember me when you come into your kingdom."

42N 23 43 kai eipen autw amhn soi legw shmeron met emou esh en tw paradeisw
42N 23 43 And he said to him, "Truly I say to you, today you will be with me in paradise."

42N 23 44 kai hn hdh wsei wra ekth kai skotos egeneto ef olhn thn ghn ews wras enaths
42N 23 44 And it was already about the sixth hour - and darkness came upon the whole earth until the ninth hour.

42N 23 45 tou hliou eklipontos escisqh de to katapetasma tou naou meson
42N 23 45 The sun was eclipsed and the veil of the temple was torn in the middle.

42N 23 46 kai fwnhsas fwnh megalh o ihsous eipen pater eis ceiras sou paratiqemai to pneuma mou touto de eipwn exepneusen
42N 23 46 And shouting with a loud voice, Jesus said "Father, into your hands I commit my spirit!". And, saying this, he expired.

We may notice the following :

1. At 23:41 we find the elements of 'exakosioi exhkonta ex' (six hundred and sixty six) = 666.
   
   
2. At 23:43 we find the phrase 'shmeron met emou esh en tw paradeisw' (today you will be with me in paradise). The use of the word 'paradise' suggests Genesis is involved here - and we find that the first use of the word 'shmeron' is at Gn.4:14 associated with the curse of Cain - who will be 'hidden from your face'. The quasi-homophonic/homonymic word 'shmeion' (a sign) then occurs in the next verse. It looks possible that 'shmeron' (today) is the 'shmeion' (the sign) of Cain. Certainly it is likely he will need 'a sign' - for he is 'hidden from your face'. If this is right, then here the author of 'Luke' has Jesus speak the 'sign of Cain'.
   
   
3. At 23:45 we find another 'big fish' - in the word 'escisqh' (it was torn). The 'fish' digram 'cq' is itself 'torn' - by the insertion of two more characters to form a 'big fish'.
   
   
4. At 23:46 we have 'fwnhsas fwnh megalh' (shouting with a loud voice). The word 'fwnh' (a voice) has sinister connotations as used in scripture (but I shall not go into the reasons here). Then we may notice that there is what might be contrued to be an extra-big 'fish' here - in the phrase 'eis ceiras sou paratiqemai' (.. into your hands I commend ..). Or perhaps we could say that it is a 'big fish' with 'bread' inside it ?

It may be worth looking at Psalm 31 from which these 'last words' are taken.

Ps.31:4-5
19O 30 5 exaxeis me ek pagidos tauths hs ekruyan moi oti su ei o uperaspisths mou
19O 30 5 Extract me from this snare which was hidden from me, for you are my refuge

19O 30 6 eis ceiras sou paraqhsomai to pneuma mou elutrwsw me kurie o qeos ths alhqeias
19O 30 6 Into your hands I will commit my spirit. You will ransom me, lord, god of truth

The reference here is to a 'snare' or 'trap'. Perhaps the author of Luke's gospel has had Jesus quote from this Psalm to suggest to us that Jesus finds himself in a 'trap' at this point in the story. Then it may be significant that Jesus never gets to say 'You will ransom me, lord, god of truth'. For death takes him first.

In summary :
It appears that the last words of the dying Jesus are either tainted with 'fish' [cq] (entities reminiscent of 'satan') - or they are associated with Cain, cursed at Genesis Chapter 4 for killing his brother. Notice it was not for murdering him (foneuw) - but for killing him (apokteinw). This second word is an anagram source for Cain's own name (kain).

... and here (again) is the story of Cain's misdeed :
01O 4 9 kai eipen o qeos pros kain pou estin abel o adelfos sou o de eipen ou ginwskw mh fulax tou adelfou mou eimi egw
01O 4 9 And God said to Cain, "Where is Abel, your brother?" He said, "I do not know. AM I my brother`s keeper ?"
Note: This is the first instance of 'eimi egw' / 'egw eimi' (I AM) in Genesis - and it is Cain who says it!

01O 4 10 kai eipen o qeos ti epoihsas fwnh aimatos tou adelfou sou boa pros me ek ths ghs
01O 4 10 And God said, "What did you do? The voice of the blood of your brother shouts to me from the earth.
Note: In Greek, 'boas' is a boa; a species of serpent.

01O 4 11 kai nun epikataratos su apo ths ghs h ecanen to stoma auths dexasqai to aima tou adelfou sou ek ths ceiros sou
01O 4 11 And now you are cursed from the ground which has opened its mouth to receive the blood of your brother from your hand.
Note: We may expect to find 'aima' (blood) dispersed within the text of scripture from this point on?

01O 4 12 oti erga thn ghn kai ou prosqhsei thn iscun auths dounai soi stenwn kai tremwn esh epi ths ghs
01O 4 12 For you (will) work the earth and it will not add its strength to yield for you. You shall be contracting [alt: sighing] and shivering upon the earth."

01O 4 13 kai eipen kain pros ton kurion meizwn h aitia mou tou afeqhnai me
01O 4 13 Cain said to the lord, "My accusation [alt: guilt] (is) too great to acquit me.

01O 4 14 ei ekballeis me shmeron apo proswpou ths ghs kai apo tou proswpou sou krubhsomai kai esomai stenwn kai tremwn epi ths ghs kai estai pas o euriskwn me apoktenei me
01O 4 14 If you throw me out today from the face of the earth, I will also be hidden from your face. I shall be contracting [alt: sighing] and shivering upon the earth and it shall be that each one finding me will kill me".

01O 4 15 kai eipen autw kurios o qeos ouc outws pas o apokteinas kain epta ekdikoumena paralusei kai eqeto kurios o qeos shmeion tw kain tou mh anelein auton panta ton euriskonta auton
01O 4 15 And the lord God said to him, "Not so : whoever kills Cain will set free seven vengeances" And the lord God established a sign for Cain, so that everyone finding him should not raise him up [alt: get rid of him; hang him]
Note: kain is here in this verse 2 times overt + 8 times in anagrammatic dispersion.

01O 4 16 exhlqen de kain apo proswpou tou qeou kai wkhsen en gh naid katenanti edem
01O 4 16 Cain went out from the face of God, and dwelt in the land of Nod, opposite Eden.
Note: kain is here in this verse once overt + 3 times in anagrammatic dispersion.

6.5 Conclusion
In Genesis Chapter 4, 'kain' (Cain) kills his brother Abel.

In Genesis Chapter 25, 'iakwb' (Jacob) is born to 'isaak' (Isaac) and 'rebekka' (Rebecca). Rebecca loves Jacob - but Jacob loses no time in abusing his twin brother Esau.

When she first appears in the story at Gn.24:24, Rebecca identifies herself with the use of Cain's 'trade-mark' phrase. First used by Cain at Gn.4:9, it is 'eimi egw' (AM I). In the story, Abraham's servant has been sent to find a wife for Isaac :

01O 24 16 h de parqenos hn kalh th oyei sfodra parqenos hn anhr ouk egnw authn katabasa de epi thn phghn eplhsen thn udrian kai anebh
01O 24 16 And the virgin was good to look at. She was absolutely a virgin, a man did not know her. And going down to the spring, she filled the water pot and came up.
.....
01O 24 24 kai eipen autw qugathr baqouhl eimi egw tou melcas on eteken tw nacwr
01O 24 24 And she said to him "A daughter of Bathouel AM I, of Melchas whom she bore to Nachor".

She is the first person in the scripture stories to be identified as 'a virgin' (and as such the pattern is set for the representation of Mary as 'virgin mother' in the gospels of Matthew and Luke). Then remember that at Gn.27:13 Rebecca takes upon herself the curse for Jacob's impersonation of Esau. For this act of deception, perpetrated by Jacob upon his own father Isaac, is actually Rebecca's idea. Here the pattern of evil breaks into the story once again - and it was always predictable that this dreadful story of familial deceit would have serious consequences in subsequent scripture. For a theme which runs through all scripture is that Cain cannot be kept down.

In the Gospel of John [Jn.4:5-29] Jesus [alias: Jacob] meets with a Samaritan woman (of course it is at Jacob's well in the town of Sychar). And, in this clever piece of allegory, the woman is apparently Mary Magdalene [alias: Rebecca, his own mother]. Then we should be on our guard. For the stories of 'Genesis' establish both Rebecca and Jacob as deceivers - and the ariqmos value of 'rebekka' (Rebecca) = 153. How intriguing that this is given as the number of 'big fish' in the catch described in the post-resurrectional story at Jn.21:11. Can this suggest that 'rebekka' is herself a 'big fish' ?

43N 21 11 anebh oun simwn petros kai eilkusen to diktuon eis thn ghn meston icquwn megalwn ekaton penthkonta triwn kai tosoutwn ontwn ouk escisqh to diktuon
43N 21 11 Then Simon Peter went up and drew the net onto the earth, full of big fish, one hundred and fifty three. And (there) being so many, the net was not torn.
Note: The net is referred to with the phrase 'ouk escisqh' (it was not torn). But this very word contains the digram c..q (a 'big fish') which (as with the veil of the temple) is itself 'a fish torn in two'.

And how interesting to see that 'h magdalhnh' (known in the gospel of John as 'Mary the Magdalene') also has ariqmos value = 153 - and indeed 'maria' (Mary) = 152. Moreover 'maria' clearly has 'aima' (blood) within her name : perhaps it serves to remind us of the blood shed by Cain in killing his brother Abel.

Note: If you want to check this arithmetic for yourself, the conventional number equivalents of the Greek characters are given in section 3.2 (Chapter 3) of this web-site at 3.2 Technical Matters.

In the crucifixion scenes of the gospels, the figure dying on the central one of the three crosses (trees) speaks (in Greek) 'fish' [cq] derived from the Hebrew version of Psalm 22 - and in the texts 'fish' are a token of evil. So why have the authors provided for this?

By scriptural tradition, satan was always a liar - the great deceiver. The actual method of his deception may be anything viable - but impersonating God is perhaps favourite. This may be because it is difficult (for the reader) to counter - particularly if 'eternal life' is on the reward list as well. But these lies within the text of scripture can be detected - provided you are willing to look and listen for the clues - and to work at solving the riddles.

And unless we do this, we remain as candidates for satan's prescription set out for us at Isaiah 6:9 - and echoed through the texts of the NT :

akoh akousete kai ou mh sunhte kai bleponteV bleyete kai ou mh idhte
"With hearing, you will hear, but not understand : Seeing, you will see, but not perceive ".

Remember Jacob. He is Israel, the father of the nation. Yet he deceives his own father - even about his own identity. Impersonation is his method - and this impersonation is one which takes place within a written story.

The Judaeo-Christian scriptures are just that. They are stories : and they are not records of history. But all the same it may be a purpose of the author(s) that through the medium of these stories the reader should be 'put to the test'.

And should the reader fail to realise that he has been cast loose in a spiritual 'minefield', then he (or she) may only be added to the number of those who, over the centuries, have been quite unwittingly deceived. Accordingly the Judaeo-Christian scripture is to be read with great care - and always with reference to the text in its original form.

To rely upon a translation to another language (however literal) is indeed unwise. For, given the intensive nature of the texts, this is almost certain to lead the reader to a conclusion which is invalid.

Likewise, reading the texts of the 'new testament' without first establishing a reasonable knowledge of the foregoing texts (and in particular the book of 'Genesis') will be more than likely to result in the reader failing to penetrate the message. And because of the nature of these texts, those failing to penetrate them may indeed be numbered amongst those unwittingly deceived. For more than 50 years I was myself in this category. So, in writing this now, I do not lack a sense of what is involved.

In Greek the word 'grhgoreite' means 'watch out' (and from this word derives the name Gregory). The word is used 10 times within the NT canon. For example :

40N 25 13 grhgoreite oun oti ouk oidate thn hmeran oude thn wran
40N 25 13 Then watch out, because you do not know the day - nor the hour.

You too may like to 'watch out' - in Greek, of course - for the 'bread' and for the 'fish'.

6.6 PostScript
This site is still 'under construction'. So please forgive its shortcomings ! There is always more which might be done.

If you would like to make any comments (favourable or otherwise) or have any corrections to offer, then I would be delighted to hear from you - and please accept my thanks in advance. Please use this e-mail address :

6.7 References
[1] Metzger, Bruce M., "Manuscripts of the Greek Bible", Oxford University Press, 1981, : ISBN 0-19-502924-0, p.36
[2] - idem, p.31