samedi 21 septembre 2013

ascii code gematria

I was hearing Chuck Missler say that if the Antichrist is identified by gematria, it would be the only time the Holy Spirit used that method. But something similar can be said for astrology and the Magi - even if it were incorrect, even if the Magi in question were not real astrologers but waiting for that particular star only and watching for no other stars, and waiting for it on orders of the prophet Balaam (a k a Bileam). He made a point there are different kinds of gematria and if you torture the facts long enough they will yield. Ragil is the one in which you add up the number values of the letters and nothing else.

Now, on top of Hebrew and Greek alphabet, our day has seen a new gematria become widely known and therefore possible. In Roman Numerals only few of the letters have number values - M D C L X V I which add up to 1666 by the way - which is why Latin Alphabet has been seen as irrelevant for gematria compared to Hebrew. S has the value 1/2 and is therefore irrelevant unless you get two s. On the other hand I can also be the number value of J, V of U, as for W one can probably make it V + V. There have been attempts to make artificially a gematria on Latin alphabet by making numbers 1-9 correspond to first nine letters and 10-90 to next nine letters, as in Greek and Hebrew. But this has never been the way arithmetic outside gematria has been noted by people writing in the Latin alphabet, so it is a bit hard to make number values stick.

Our day has seen a new set of number values attached to Latin Alphabet in its English variety. A is 65 or 0065. B is 66. C is 67. Z is 90. Certain national alphabets have other letters too, like Swedish Å, 197, or French Ç, 199. Do you see what I mean? Now, there is a reason why I use majuscules here. Minuscules a - z are not 65-90 but far higher numbers, 97 - 122. These are lower than the ascii values for special characters, but of those there are not that many in each word, besides it would be bad spelling to rewrite them in number values of the original letters. So, let's add up some.

I wanted to know if I am clean myself first. It seems I am (not tried minuscules yet and looking for multiples of that bad number). LUNDAHL is 520. HANS is 298. GEORG is 372. HANS and GEORG add up to 670 - so I am in a sense "neighbour of the beast" if you see what I mean. And I have been living in bad neighbourhoods lots of parts of my life up to now, so that has come true a bit. I wonder if another Hans-Georg, namely Gadamer, is not enjoying that neighbourhood more than I. If I ad ascii values for MIKAEL 435 and ELIZUR 475 I get a total of 2100 (or if I spell it ELITZUR, then 2184). That is not divisible by 37 or its products or by 18 and its products. I even tried seeing if the sums could be used as ascii code for letters adding up to the bad number by some other gematria. Alt + 0520 gave no sign. The sums for my given names are here: *t³Û. The sum of HANS GEORG as 670 is ž. Now, let us see what some other guys get.

VLADIMIR is 600. PUTIN is 400. Adds up to 1000, have not taken into account his patronymic Vladimirovich. Here is some for Obama:

Barack 420 Hussein 543 Obama 352 II 146 = 1461

If sums are used as ascii code they give: ¤ `’Á

082083065 0352
075073  1300
 078320 0150
390 032 0011
 033352 1461

Now, for the man called François Hollande, the C with cédille even in the upper case (199, remember) sums gives a name even for just François which is too large: 729. I have not tried adding up total to look for multiples.

There is another Francis, if he be Pope. His name before the conclave, if such it was, was Jorge Bergoglio. Jorge, no problem. 375. But, Bergoglio, alas: 666.* That is not the case with Ratzinger, which is 694. If both are / were Popes, neither is concerned, because the name before God is the Papal name. If neither is / was Pope, Ratzinger is not concerned, but Bergoglio is. If Ratzinger was Pope, maybe he still is, and his resignation is invalid. That is however a chapter in itself even apart from gematria.

[*Rechecking, it seems to be 665!]

Now, a Pope did give a warning about gematria in the context, not to look for the name sum, since many names add up (in Classic Greek gematria) to 666, but to the one who does the deeds of Antichrist. That also is quite another than ascii code gematria.

Written by
Hans-Georg Lundahl
Nanterre University Library
St Matthew's Feast Apostle and Evangelist
and St Jonah the Prophet's

PS, Chuck Missler was a bit wrong. David seems to be Daleth Vav Daleth = 14. Unless I misunderstood Jonathan Sarfati on something. King David was 14th descendant from Abraham. Christ Jesus was the third time 14th generation from Abraham, if you discount three bad generations (husband, son, and grandson of Athaliah). And today's Saint wrote a Gospel where the first chapter spells that out./HGL

PPS, if the valid Pope is Francis, he would perhaps be more concerned if he abdicated and returned to his old name./HGL

Some authors:

E069  H072D0068 420
R082 500L076I0073 024
T084 038  N0078  
O079   620B0066 444
N078 538 044U0085  
 850   664G0071  
 063    H0072  
 913     1030  

PPPS, I checked with minuscules (a-z = 97 - 122 or each minuscule has a number value 32 units bigger than the majuscule) for Jorge Mario Bergoglio. It gave 1928. Just exactly 70 = capital F away from three times the bad number. Important update, 7-XII-2013: rechecked, it gave 1929. This is now making me recheck the calculations all over.

PPPPS, I came across a site that revived the old calumny against the Papacy that the Papal title "Vicarius Filii Dei" adds up to 666 in Roman Numerals. Those words do add up, but do not form a papal title. And the real Papal titles "Vicarius Christi" and "Servus Servorum Dei" do not add up to that number. My suspicion is neither with Papacy nor with Jesuits as such - but with the man.

Update: I found the Hebrew Letter Gematria Nimrod Ben Kush = 666.

Peter Goodgame is the source:

Part Nine of The Giza Discovery

I may not like Bergoglio, I may deeply mistrust him, but I can recall that at least two Popes were called after the Antichristians afflicting them. Pius IX was called "Crux de Cruce" meaning the House of Savoy (which has a Cross in its heraldry) caused him a great Cross or affliction (in 1870). Similarily an earlier Pius (VI or VII) was called Aquila Rapax because Napoleon afflicted him. But if he is not a real Pope, he could be connected in the future to Nimrod Ben Kush./HGL

8 commentaires:

  1. I want to inform you:

    "The number of his name... count the number of the beast: for it is the number of a man... and his number is 666." (Revelation 13:17,18)

    ... first "beast coming up out of the sea"

    ... it will be wounded and healed miraculous

    ... the name of the Beast in


    ALT 66 = B
    ALT 69 = E
    ALT 82 = R
    ALT 71 = G
    ALT 79 = O
    ALT 71 = G
    ALT 76 = L
    ALT 73 = I
    ALT 79 = O


  2. Hans Georg Lundahl22 juin 2015 à 10:20

    Indeed, BERGOGLIO was 666.

    One SuZar or Dr. Epps pretends that so is HOLYBIBLE, that is wrong.

    H 72 70 2
    O 78 140 10
    L 76 210 16
    Y 89 290 25
    B 66 350 31
    I 73 420 34
    B 66 480 40
    L 76 550 46
    E 69 610 55 / 610+55=665

  3. To prove we are not wrong on sum of BERGOGLIO, let us break it down same way:

    B 66 60 6
    E 69 120 15
    R 82 200 17
    G 71 270 18 ( !)
    O 79 340 27
    G 71 410 28
    L 76 480 34
    I 73 550 37 (!)
    O 79 620 46 / 620+46=666 (=18*37 !)

  4. There is more to this.

    JRGERIBERLI MAGOG & OOO (vav, vav, vav?)
    JRERLI MAGOG & OOO (vav, vav, vav?) GIBER (man, in Hebrew? I don't know for sure?)

    J 74 70 4
    R 82 150 6
    E 69 210 15
    R 82 290 17
    L 76 360 23
    I 73 430 26 ... no, not the value I was searching.

    What if we had GEBER?

    JRGERIBERLI MAGOG & OOO (vav, vav, vav?)
    JRRILI MAGOG & OOO (vav, vav, vav?), GEBER

    J 74 70 4
    R 82 150 6
    R 82 230 8
    I 73 300 11
    L 76 370 17
    I 73 420 20 no, not the value I was looking for either.

    What if we take reverse code? A=90, Z=65?


    J 81 80 1
    R 73 150 4
    E 86 230 10
    R 73 300 13
    L 79 370 22
    I 82 450 24 / 450+24 = 474.
    474 in majuscules = 666 in all minuscules (add 32 per minuscule).

  5. Oh, counted wrong on O:

    H 72 70 2
    O 79 140 11
    L 76 210 17
    Y 89 290 26
    B 66 350 32
    I 73 420 35
    B 66 480 41
    L 76 550 47
    E 69 610 56

  6. However, English is the only language in which this is so, that I know of - Latin, German, Swedish and Spanish Bibles do not have this problem.

    For instance, HOLYBIBLE counting just letters, just majuscules, no spaces, points, hyphens, dashes, underscores and no minuscules, is within range for danger of this number, since it is nine letters. HEILIGEBIBEL is twelve letters, which is beyond this danger zone.

    In letters of the English alphabet only, the danger zone extends from ten letters (theoretic range 650 - 900, but no word is ten A or ten Z), over nine letters (585 - 810) down to eight letters (520 - 720).

    In letters of the English alphabet only, seven is below danger zone with a range of 455 - 630. However, accented letters can extend the danger zone downwards. É = 201 = 3 * 67 = C + C + C. And é (if we peek at minuscules for a moment) = 233 = 3 * 65 + 38 [38= 3*13 - 1] = 3 * 78 - 1 = M + N + N.

    So, the common accented vowel letters can count as around 3 letters - or more, haven't checked whether ú (250) could perhaps be four. In the case of these, as with letters of English alphabet, minuscule value is 32 above majuscule value.

    An uncommon accented letter, like what you can find in Eastern European languages (where you can combine accent and Ö in Hungarian for getting an O with two accents instead of two dots when Ö is long, or where Polish has an L striken through to represent a thick L, and so on), the majuscule and minuscule are usually next to each other. But the values are higher up than for common accents, they belong to unicode but are not universally accessible in html, and so on.

  7. Now, the developers of ascii code were probably into esoterism at some level, and so a result like HOLYBIBLE=666 can have been intended.

    They can have meant to give an impression like "look, if HOLYBIBLE is 666, 666 can't be bad, and therefore the man who gets that value should be trusted" - or an impression like "look, if HOLYBIBLE says 666 is bad and HOLYBIBLE is 666, then HOLYBIBLE refutes itself".

    Well, first of all, it is as number value of the name of a man that this is bad. Not as number value of the name of a book, the name of which means books. So, if such meanings were intended, they do not follow.

    Also, 666 talents of solid gold to the Temple of Solomon were not bad. But when, after Solomon finishes Temple he wants 666 talents of solid gold for himself too ... uh oh!

    I can give other interpretations to this. The Holy Writ is the Word of Truth as transmitted through the public Revelation. So, this confirms that ascii code is a way of finding the man of perdition.

    Or, this applies to Holy Bible in English - and English Bible readers have been more preoccupied than other ones with finding man of perdition.

    Or, this applies to Holy Bible in English - and says something on which language the man of perdition reads the Bible in. This is one aspect which one might consider as exonerating Bergoglio, but not too, much, since he was so close friends with Tony Palmer - an Anglican "Bishop" - who obviously read the Bible in English.

    It could be a warning against the King James version. For instance where what corresponds to one occurrence of Latin "pascha" is rendered traditionally Easter and all other ones are rendered Feast of Unleavened Bread.

    This had misled people who include Kent Hovind to speculate in Herod celebrating a spring festival names after Ishtar and that being identic to the Easter of the Catholic Church, also taken over by Lutherans and Anglicans. Well, no, the Easter feast has nothing to do with Ishtar and Herod was celebrating the Jewish Easter, the Feast of Unleavened Bread.

  8. When I said that a result as this can have been intended, this may sound as balderdash. How could you possibly have made a thing like that?

    Well, if you give A value 1 and Z value 26, all you need to do is mark up phrases you are interested in in this number system. Then you note the number sum.

    GHI J 10
    QRST 20

    H 8 - 8
    O 15 10 13
    L 12 20 15
    Y 25 40 20
    B 2 40 22
    I 9 40 31
    B 2 40 33
    L 12 50 35
    E 5 50 40 = 90

    Then one starts adding multiples of nine.

    Suppose A were to be 11 in the ascii code system, we would only deal with 90+10*9 = 180. And so on. When they reached a number that came close, they tiptoed adding nine each time. And since 666 = 18 * 37 = 9 * 74, this method worked for this phrase.

    One could make a code in which this phrase was marked this way. But in doing so, one may have miscalculated how the meaning of such a hit would work out.