[Kaputnix]

I've had a problem reading around the Yeshua code. It seems as though the author lost continuity in deciphering the code. The instructions state to read around the "I Am" and "Yeshua" scroll code. Reading it in a counter clockwise direction only reveals half the code. The other half seems to change direction and start in a completely different direction... not to mention negating any continuity for the first two characters.

Why did the auther not continue to decipher the code in the same direction. And why is there no continuity in direction for the second half of the code? Seems to me that it was not deciphered properly using linguistic method of codebreaking.

In the love of Christ,
your brother
Kap:)

[Miki]

Why don't you just ask him. You can email him through this forum.
He's always been very helpful towards me.

[Shekel]

Hi,
the instuctions to go around the code is found in the mene-tekel code, though the Yeshua code does the same. What is happening is that the code is read by reading around at least one full circuit, and then it is read backward at least one full circuit. All the codes read forward and backward and this one is no different. The order is consistent as well, foward then backward, then next part, forward then backward, and so on. The entire mene-tekel code reads like this. It is remarkable that it can read anything---even nonsense---in both directions consistently.

You can find out more about how it was disciphered here: http://www.bible-cod...bible-codes.htm

If after reading this above page you think there is still some inconsistency then please write back and tell me exactly where and how, for if there is then it will surely cause it to read even better once corrected!

[Kaputnix]

Ok, I see where I went wrong. But I did still find a problem with the deciphering of the Yeshua code. I fully agree with the method of doubling back over the characters to continue the code. The problem is, the author who deciphered and translated the code jumped part of it, not to mention there might be some translational differences. My understanding of reading it two ways means that once you come to a stop, you continue from the last character you finished with.

Although my OT Hebrew is not very good, I have enough language skills to look things up in the dictionary. After the first half of the code, I continued over the code backwards from the last character "sh". This is my translation when reading around the Yeshua code:

[They cried] Save us*! Shall the prince** be*** a man?
[He was] Pleased**** [saying], "It shall be"!
Behold salvation's gift,
God shall be*** that man.

* coming from the word 'salvation'
** This is the meaning in Aramaic. I'm not sure the meaning in ancient Hebrew
*** or 'become'
**** It can also read "Showing willingness, [he said], 'It shall be'.

Please let me know your input on this matter, but according to the rules of falling back on the previous characters, as is in the case with the lamp's decipherment, this is what I found.

Your brother in Christ,
Kap:)

[Kaputnix]

Looking over it again, I just realized that reading it back and forward on the method I just discribed, both verses are written with the same first character on the bottom right hand corner of the code. Somehow I think this is just a little more than coincidental! Please check and verify this for me.

In Christ,
Kap:)

[Shekel]

Your method seems to yield a clearer message. (I will have to check it out tomorrow.) However, the basic method I use is that the place where I begin to read again, except in the opposite position, does not matter, as long as at least all of the letters are used at least once going around. In the mene-tekel code, the starting positions of the letters were all consistent except for once (out of 10) circles. It did not matter to me where they started each time, but I certainly noticed this pattern. (It seems to me to be impossible to be merely the work of chance.) Moreover, the letters formed an acrostic agreeable to the rest of the code! It may be that the one circle was not correct. It would make only a slight change in the overall code though. As I recall, the one circle could be made to be in alignment with the rest, but it did not seem to read quite as smooth so I opted for the irregularity of starting positions rather than a difficult reading.

So my overall thought is that it is not necessary to start reading from the same letter that one ends off on when going in reverse order. I look upon it as a new circle of reading in and of itself. But if I am wrong, then that would make the code the more mind bending since it would then be even more restricted in how it can be read. I appreciate your insight, and you may well be right.