Post by Caligastia Lanonandek on Dec 17, 2008 18:23:40 GMT -5
People who have made the effort to learn and 'read' code, frequently run into a problem in the different writing styles between Daniel and John.
Daniel frequently speaks by analogy - using an historical event of his time to highlight a future moment that is the same or similar.
John uses metaphors where he has redefined certain words. For this to be practical, he also had to serve up a dictionary of terms and phrases. He did. For instance, a star is actually an angel.
Additionally, he put the two edged sword warning early on in the text letting people know that a single word can have two meanings. Theologians have been bickering for 2000 years over the meaning of this word or that. It never occured to them that both readings could simultaneously be true.
In the current Thor's gate example, it became clear to me that Daniel was not having a dimensional vision - he was picked up and actually taken to the place. Due to the time differences, he'd have gone to bed and was asleep when the event began. Dimensional things frequently leave the flavor of a dream or vision. Further, he'd have awakened in his own bed. So he reports a vision.
While John uses the same encryption methodology, he added his own twists to it making the product unique from Daniel's work.
If one doesn't allow for these differences in authorship - it becomes confusing.
Also, John employed Daniel as a subset to his work and incorporated it via the keyword (phrase) methdology. Frequently, he chooses to make a different point than did Daniel. So he chose a different but similar keyword. For instance, eyes of fire versus eyes of flame. In other instances, he chose to leave Daniel's comments standing on their own and linked into them with the same keyword.
Daniel's description of Thor's gate is highly accurate and it takes what one would assume to be a subjective dimensional event and raises it to hard objective fact. Combining all of the information that has flooded in 'at this moment', speaks to the time and timing involved.
I've mentioned that on things, I get the equivalent of a 2 minute warning. It's my feeling that I'm in the 2 minute zone now. If I'm correct, know that I've made arrangements for issues of continuity and the Advens will take over things here. Furthermore, I have the equivalent of a dead man's switch in place.
Additionally, I have two friends who are in a bad way because of the economy and I'll be giving them my residence and the things they'll need to survive. In return, my dog has someone to care for her.
As for the actual moment of transition - I don't have the first clue nor is it my call.
As always, I could be wrong - but I don't think so. If I did, I'd not say anything in the first place.
Daniel frequently speaks by analogy - using an historical event of his time to highlight a future moment that is the same or similar.
John uses metaphors where he has redefined certain words. For this to be practical, he also had to serve up a dictionary of terms and phrases. He did. For instance, a star is actually an angel.
Additionally, he put the two edged sword warning early on in the text letting people know that a single word can have two meanings. Theologians have been bickering for 2000 years over the meaning of this word or that. It never occured to them that both readings could simultaneously be true.
In the current Thor's gate example, it became clear to me that Daniel was not having a dimensional vision - he was picked up and actually taken to the place. Due to the time differences, he'd have gone to bed and was asleep when the event began. Dimensional things frequently leave the flavor of a dream or vision. Further, he'd have awakened in his own bed. So he reports a vision.
While John uses the same encryption methodology, he added his own twists to it making the product unique from Daniel's work.
If one doesn't allow for these differences in authorship - it becomes confusing.
Also, John employed Daniel as a subset to his work and incorporated it via the keyword (phrase) methdology. Frequently, he chooses to make a different point than did Daniel. So he chose a different but similar keyword. For instance, eyes of fire versus eyes of flame. In other instances, he chose to leave Daniel's comments standing on their own and linked into them with the same keyword.
Daniel's description of Thor's gate is highly accurate and it takes what one would assume to be a subjective dimensional event and raises it to hard objective fact. Combining all of the information that has flooded in 'at this moment', speaks to the time and timing involved.
I've mentioned that on things, I get the equivalent of a 2 minute warning. It's my feeling that I'm in the 2 minute zone now. If I'm correct, know that I've made arrangements for issues of continuity and the Advens will take over things here. Furthermore, I have the equivalent of a dead man's switch in place.
Additionally, I have two friends who are in a bad way because of the economy and I'll be giving them my residence and the things they'll need to survive. In return, my dog has someone to care for her.
As for the actual moment of transition - I don't have the first clue nor is it my call.
As always, I could be wrong - but I don't think so. If I did, I'd not say anything in the first place.
