[See * for latest revision: April 3, 2003]


   The idea is simple:  If one takes every 7th letter or
every 10th letter or every 231st letter of the Hebrew text
of the Bible (generally meaning the traditional Masoretic
text used in most synagogues), these letters themselves
sometimes may spell out words, either in Hebrew or in Latin,
Greek or English or other languages.  Frequently such words
can be found "clustered" in a "design" around a topic that
ties them all together, such as, for example, the murder
of JFK or the birth of Jesus.

   The key to everything is the traditional "Masoretic" 
Hebrew text.  The Masorete story begins after the burning
of the Temple by the Romans.  Rabbis took steps late in
the first century to preserve a true copy of their Bible.
Within a few decades a system for copying the text began
to emerge.  This system was perfected by the 3rd century
by a scribal family known as "Masoretes."  All of these
efforts were based upon an official Hebrew text rescued
from Jerusalem in 70 AD.  That text had been officially
copied from the authoritative index scrolls kept at the
Temple since the days of Ezra, under whom the Scriptures
had finally been completed and canonized.

   The only break in this history occurred during those
few years between Antiochus Epiphanes and the Maccabees,
less than a decade.  During that time the sacred scroll
was identifiable by some "astrological" symbols written
on the outside.  This text was rescued by the Maccabees
and actually carried into battle because it was deemed
so holy and sacred it was thought to have magical power
to defeat the Syrians.  The man who carried it was later
made High Priest when the Maccabees restored the Temple
in the miraculous events commemorated by Hannukah.  This
feast was honored and kept by Jesus [Jn 10:22].

*  The system developed by the Masoretes is extremely
important to the debate over the codes.  When any copy of 
the text was made, it was virtually like a photo-copy.
Each page was identical to the one being copied:  Every
line was identical, beginning and ending with the same
words as the original.  And to make sure that no errors
could slip by, there were "test letters" in each line of
text.  These were to be counted off so that a particular
letter had to be, for example, the 17th letter from the
left of a given line and, say, 21st from the right end
of that line.  Each line had to have a certain number of
letters.  There were test letters for each line.  Every
page had to have a certain number of lines.

   What all this produced was a text that was so uniform
from one copy to the next that any errors would not make
a major change in the over-all distance from the correct
parts of the text to other correct passages.  There were
exactly the same number of letters between these correct
portions of the text, even though a letter might be off
here and there.

*  Now it should be obvious that even though some errors
might be in the text, they would have relatively little
effect on the distances between letters on average. And
equally important, if more than three errors were found
in a scroll, it was considered unacceptable for use in a

   Thus, the likely effect of an error in the Masoretic
copies would be to eliminate a code that might already
be there, by changing a single letter that would have
been needed to form one Bible Code word. Far less likely
would be an error that created a fake Bible Code word.

   To generate Bible Codes by such errors, one would be
required to have such a massive number of miscopied and
faulty words that the Hebrew text would be reduced to an
incomprehensible string of gibberish.  The reason Bible
Codes could only be generated by massive errors of this
kind is that genuine codes contain several long words in
a contiguous matrix or design that is statistically not
reproducible by chance.  To have such a complex set of
"hits" result requires a large number of errors placed
in the text at just the right intervals.  To generate a
hundred or more such codes (and the Bible Codes are way
beyond that total) would so pepper the Hebrew text with
errors that it would become unreadable.  This is because
the codes only sample a tiny portion of the text at any
given time.  To create even a few codes, the number of
errors needed would be enormous.

   Jewish statisticians have verified that some codes do
in fact exist in the text at levels above chance.  The
fact of such encoding cannot be refuted by reference to
errors in the Masoretic text.  The number of errors we
need to find to destroy the statistical validity of the
codes would be larger than any Masoretic variations we
have found in any copies of that version of the text.
Indeed, it could be argued that the number of errors
needed would be so great that the resulting text would
frequently be impossible to read at all.


   One of the main issues about Bible Codes is the claim
that they are based upon the complete reliability of the
Hebrew text, which the critics dispute.  Their claim is
that the Hebrew Bible exists in "thousands" of different
versions.  It would take only a few variations in a text
to destroy the code patterns, they claim (in spite of
the undeniable evidence just cited to the contrary).

   To support their contention, they cite all the various
Dead Sea Scroll versions of the Bible, and several kinds
of text related to the Septuagint Greek translation.  The
critics also cite a medieval version similar to the basic
Masoretic text synagogues use, but which has a number of
different readings.  Moreover, variant wordings are found
in certain references in the Talmud and other rabbinical
commentaries.  In addition, one can infer alternate text
readings from some Bible quotations in the New Testament.

   Is all this a serious problem for the codes?

   Hardly.  First, there are NOT "thousands" of different
versions of the Hebrew Bible with a historic basis for any
ancient heritage.  Not one document among all the Biblical
manuscripts found among the Dead Sea Scrolls can be traced
back historically to a known authoritative source.  No one
really knows where these fragmentary and often impossible-
to-read manuscripts came from.  One theory is that they are
the "library" of a heretical Jewish sect of Essenes.  This
would certainly not be an official Jewish Temple source,
and therefore, it could not be traced to any authoritative 
origin.  We simply do not have a sufficient history of the
Essenes to provide such documentation for any text these
people might theoretically have used.  Tracing texts to
the Essenes is tracing texts to a people whose historical
link to the official Biblical text of the Temple cannot be
verified at all.

   If anything, these heretical Essene communities are not
to be trusted to have an accurate text tradition.  The very
fact that the Dead Sea texts do have so many variations is
absolute proof that these texts did not represent such an 
official and authoritative canon.  If these Dead Sea texts
were the work of the Essenes, that may be one reason they 
had been rejected by the Temple authorities: The Essenes
were not sticking to the official ancient text used by the 

   But there is another possibility about where these Dead
Sea texts came from.  Before the Essene theory arose, one 
leading explanation was that the caves were a "genizeh,"
or sacred permanent storage site for Scriptures and texts
that contained mentions of "YHWH"--the sacred name of God.
The rule is that such a text cannot be burned or discarded, 
but must be preserved in a special sacred storage place.

   The genizeh problem for the Bible Code critics is a
major one:  One of the uses for such storage areas was for 
the disposal of faulty copies of the Bible, produced 
by a novice scribe learning his craft.  In other words, it 
is possible some of the differences in the texts cited by 
the critcs are merely scribal errors deliberately discarded 
in the Dead Sea caves because they did not meet the high 
standards of the Masoretic version.

*  In a debate on the Art Bell show, the argument was put
forth that the Dead Sea texts are "older" and, therefore,
more likely to be "closer to their original composition."
But the Dead Sea texts, being in conflict with each other
and from an unknown source or sources, cannot be put in
the same category as the far better documented history of
the Masoretic text.

*  It was also stated that the Dead Sea texts had inserted
standard Hebrew letters for "vowels"--whereas these aren't
found in the Masoretic texts, which uses a system of dots
and dashes to indicate vowels.  The critic of the codes,
Michael Heiser, insisted that "Medieval rabbis had removed
these Hebrew letters and replaced them with vowel-points."

*  Heiser, of course, has no proof for this claim.  It is
in fact, quite unlikely to be true.  The assertion that it
was Medieval rabbis--as opposed to the original Masoretic 
scribes not long after the destruction of the Temple, that
is, around the 2nd century--who invented vowel-pointing is 
most doubtful, and is not the accepted scholarly view.

*  Moreover, the vowel-points are an extremely cumbersome
apparatus, subject to error, and it would be surpassingly
strange for the offical Masoretic scribes to have adopted
LETTERS IN USE FOR VOWELS.  Given the extreme effort these
scribes employed to preserve the accuracy of their text,
it would have been out of character for these men to have 
arbitrarily discarded supposedly genuine Hebrew 'vowels'
in a true text in order to use error-prone vowel-points. 

*  The Masoretes would have been horrified by any attempt
to discard Hebrew letters from the text in this manner.

*  Heiser's proposed historic scenario makes no sense out
of the evidence at hand.  The Masoretes would never have
participated in such a wholesale corruption of the text.
And there is no rational reason for them to have done so,
quite the contrary.  They did everything they could think
of to preserve the text, as we have shown.

*  It should be obvious that the extra "vowel-letters" in
the Dead Sea versions were added to help non-scribes who
wished to read the scrolls.  And who were these non-scribe
readers?  Probably ordinary Jewish men in the synagogues.
The text Heiser cited was Isaiah, and that was the very
scroll Jesus stood up to read in the Nazareth synagogue.

*  These synagogue scrolls may well have had extra letters
added to make them easier for laymen to read, much as we
use transliterations of Hebrew and Greek words today.

*  So Heiser's "original" scrolls were not original at all,
but were almost certainly the tranliterated versions with
extra added Hebrew letters to simplify reading by laymen 
in synagogues, discarded in the caves (ie, a genizeh).

   As for the Septuagint text, ALL ancient sources are in
unanimous agreement that this translation was done under 
the command of the pagan gentile king Ptolemy II of Egypt.  
It is hardly to be expected that a translation done for the 
gentiles would be perfectly accurate.  Indeed, rabbis down 
to this day consider this translation one of the greatest 
tragedies ever to befall the Jewish people.  In fact, 
according to Jerome, in his introduction to his translation 
of Ezekiel, it was forbidden for some parts of the Bible 
to be discussed with any person outside of strict rabbinical 
control.  The Septuagint, in fact, was officially condemned 
as faulty and inaccurate--as a bad translation, in other 
words--by Jewish authorities in the second century.

   It is offensive to believing Jewish people to place this
faulty Septuagint text on a par with the Masoretic version.
They would never take seriously this argument by the critics. 

   Inferring Hebrew texts from translated commentaries, or
other such secondary sources like the Talmud, is a really
risky venture.  It has little value for establishing any 
kind of authoritative text because one can never be sure
whether the writer is paraphrasing or what their sources
were, or how accurately the transmission has been.

   Finally, there's a Hebrew manuscript that is supposedly
based upon the Masoretic version, but has several textual
differences.  The problem with this copy is that there is
no historical link that carries its heritage back to known
schools of Masoretic copyists.  It floats in a historical
vacuum, unconnected to the official Masoretic tradition.

   In sum, there are simply no real serious competitors
to the traditional Masoretic text, which is the only text
being used by the Bible Code researchers.


   The other critical issue is calculating whether codes
are appearing by chance, or at a rate so far beyond chance
that some intelligent Source must be considered.  Only if
the latter is true in the specific code being cited can it
be considered a genuine Bible Code, that is, an inpired
one.  Proving that there is a general validity to these
codes is NOT proof that ALL codes one might "find" were
put there by God (as we shall demonstrate below).

   Statisticians are currently debating this issue based
upon pre-set standards.  They decide to look for a certain
kind of information and then calculate the odds of finding
it.  Then they see how often it appears in codes or they 
try to measure how "tight" the cluster of words is.

   Unfortunately, what these code studies are not looking
at is the ability of the designs to introduce novel words
and phrases into a topic: Unexpected elements that no one
anticipated or knew might be connected, but which prove to
be extremely relevant.  An example would be a code about
the JFK murder in Dallas that includes a name that no one
had heard about, but which later emerges as someone quite
important to the crime.

   Some code-hunters have started using two-letter codes
that supposedly represent "UN" or "US" or "NY" or "LA" or
other such abbreviations.  Yet many of these do not match
the Hebrew letters used for them.  But worse, there is NO
STATISTICAL SIGNIFICANCE in two-letter codes: ANY code of
two letters (or two digit numbers) will be present in ANY
HEBREW TEXT (or Greek, for that matter, Biblical or not),
if the entire Hebrew alphabet is present in the sample.

   EVERY SUCH 2-LETTER CODE IS A FAKE. Those who use them
either do not know anything about statistics or are lying
about their expertise or motives in presenting such fake
codes as genuine.

   Not one two-letter code is a true Bible code, for all
such two-letter combinations can be found in every text,
even modern Jewish newspapers!  They have no statistical
value whatsoever.  In fact, you can find every single one
of the Postal Service's two-letter state-codes in every
English text that has all 26 letters of our alphabet. If
you doubt this, simply glance down at your computer and
look at the keyboard.

   Three-letter codes are borderline:  It is about even
odds that many such codes will appear in a sample, if a
three-letter word uses common Hebrew letters.  Many new
codes now appearing on the internet are mostly two- and
three-letter codes of no statistical significance.  This
was the case with the notorious "Y2K" codes some people
claimed to find back in 1999.

   Genuine codes have words of at least four letters, and
these are usually inter-connected in designs and patterns
that form pictures or graphics.  Typical fake codes make
a pretense at forming a "cluster," but rarely show words
intersecting each other in a meaningful way.  Most of the
words in fake codes are scattered around the page in very
random ways.

   Fake codes often have a pre-set political or relgious
agenda.  The fake code "hunter" uses a computer to "find"
things they were looking for all along.  In real codes,
there is usually a surprise factor.

   True code-hunters find words and phrases that appear
strange or out-of-place.  Only after independent analysis
do they discover the unexpected words and phrases are not 
only relevant, but often absolutely essential to the full
meaning of the design.  The "GREEN MAN" codes found by
researcher Tom Mack are an example of this phenomenon.
Tom had assumed they were about Al Gore.  But as you will
see, the real topic was far more important.

   Before we investigate the "GREEN MAN" codes, we need
to see the reverse side of the coin:  A code that is not
really there. Some people are "finding" codes where none
exist.  But others find legitimate codes and try to make
them say more than they ought to.  An example of this
latter problem is the "CHRISTMAS" code, where overzealous
researchers jumped to a totally unfounded conclusion:


   Taking advantage of the Christmas season, a Bible Code
critic turned code magazine publisher, sent an internet
press release out which claimed that the term "CHRISTMAS"
had been found in a favorable usage in a set of Bible Code
references to the birth of Jesus.

   Since Jesus was not born at any time near the Christmas
season, but in early September (as we discussed in a large
article elsewhere on this website), we naturally wanted to
see this use of the word "CHRISTMAS" in a Bible Code.

   However, when we examined the claimed text in detail, we
discovered that the supposed use of "CHRISTMAS" was totally
absent from the code in question.  The word does not appear
in the code at all.  The pattern does refer to aspects of
the birth of Jesus, but the word "CHRISTMAS" is not in it.

   "CHRISTMAS," or December 25th, is actually the birthday
of Horus and Osiris, hence of Cain, whom we have identified
as Lucifer, the spawn of Satan.  It is hardly likely that a
Bible Code would honor this pagan day in any way.  We know
that many are already using this false Bible Code claim to
argue for the celebration of Lucifer's birthday as if it is
a day honoring Christ.

   The creators of this "Christmas Code" claim are profiting
off their "discovery" by selling subscriptions to their code
magazine.  We consider this claim highly suspect, and quite
unjustified.  Although other related codes do appear linked
to the birth of Jesus in this pattern, the use of the word
"CHRISTMAS" is definitely NOT endorsed or promoted by this
or any other Bible Code we know of.  For those desiring to
decipher it themselves, here is the claimed "CHISTMAS" code:


   This might mean, "Shiloh for a mother, cures even Lud."
Their rendering is, "CHRISTMAS is a gift to him and to her."
The "Shiloh for a mother" is about as close to a Nativity as
we could translate it, but it hardly justifies the use of a
word like "CHRISTMAS" in their rendering.  Presumably there
is some explanation for their version hidden away in their
magazine, but we see no reason to pay for further insights
of this kind.


   At a completely different web-site, unconnected to the
above "CHISTMAS" code claim, another researcher has found
something of far more significant value.

   Newly-discovered Bible Codes about "The Green Man" are
being attributed to "Al Gore" as an "Environmentalist."
But we believe these codes are about Osiris (ie Cain) and 
are an extraordinarily important new finding.

   Tom Mack, the researcher who discovered these really
fascinating "Green Man" codes, has seen them as referring
to current political matters involving Al Gore (who may
have dropped out of sight entirely by the time you read
this article).  While Gore endorses the "Green" philosphy
and this does vaguely link back to the ancient belief in
"The Green Man," the connection is very weak.  In ancient
times, the "Green Man" was the "Corn King" or the "god"
of AGRICULTURE...and he was not really an evironmentalist
at all.  In fact, Genesis says he spread environmental
devastation--perhaps by soil-depleting farming methods.

   One of the problems in the whole Bible Codes business 
is the SUBJECTIVITY of how the various Hebrew letters are 
interpreted. Tom seems to have gotten caught up in all the
year 2000 election excitement and was looking for insights
into Al Gore.  We're glad he was, because he accidentally
uncovered something far more interesting.

   For example, take the Hebrew letters "Aleph-Lamed-Gimel
-Yodh-Resh" ("A-L-G-I-R"). Are they spelling "Al Gore" or 
"El Giyr"?  The former is merely an American politician who
had been popular for a while.  But if "Al Gore" were meant,
then why use a "yodh" where an "ayin"["o"] would have been
expected? Should it not read "A-L-G-O-R"?

   Yet the actual wording found in the text--"El Giyr"--
can mean "STRANGE GOD" or "BURNED TO LIME."  These are far 
more likely meanings, are spelled correctly, and fit the 
overall sense of the codes Tom found in this passage:

   "THE GREEN MAN" (literally "GREEN REDMAN"=Santa Claus!)
   "KNIGHT" (ie in a text referring to an 'archer')
   "RENAGADE" (the text specifies a 'looter')
   "INTELLIGENCE" (as in mind-reading)
   "SUBMERGE" (in tears, as Haggar does in the passage)

   Just who is this "Green Man"? Code researcher Tom Mack 
has found several other related codes.  One of them also 
speaks of "the Green Man" and links him to:

   "CAIN" ('QIN'--the correct Hebrew spelling of 'Cain')
   "H'YLL" (translated "Lucifer" in Isaiah 14)
   "BEAST" (or "LION")
   "Used WITCHcraft" (a WITCH)
   "ISLAM" ('submission' in Arabic)

   We have long argued that Cain is Lucifer, the son of 
Satan, and that he is also Osiris, well-known as 'god'
of agriculture in ancient Egypt, whose face was often 
painted green in hieroglyphs.  This "GREEN GOD" and the
related gods of Bacchus, Dionysus, Pan, Hearne, and so
on, were extremely famous and widely-beloved 'deities'
of the harvest like the GREEN CORN KING. As recently as
the Middle Ages, he is found in tales of a GREEN KNIGHT.
British pubs and inns have been named after him.  Much
of Sir George Frazier's THE GOLDEN BOUGH is devoted to
the myths, legends, and customs of this "GREEN MAN."

remembered in rituals in August, the month of the corn
harvest that pagans began by celebrating the feast of
"Lug Nasa" or "Lucifer the Prince."  It is also LEO's
month, the DOG days of Sirius (the star of Isis rising)
and the last hot solar month of the year before autumn.

   So the feasts of THE GREEN MAN are directly related 
to LEO, the LION, and to LUCIFER, the PRINCE.

   Moreover, we have also identifed LUCIFER as CAIN who 
becomes the BEAST of Revelation who will revive and be 
destroyed in the End. [See our articles on LILITH and 
THE JAWS OF DEATH, where we link Lucifer to Cain.]

   Tom Mack's third "GREEN MAN" code has these words in
its design:

   "H'YLL" (="LUCIFER")
   "ISLAM" ('submission')
   "MLK" ("ANGEL" or "KING")
   "Used WITCHcraft" (ie a WITCH)
   "LION" (or "BEAST")
   "THE GREEN MAN" (literally "GREEN REDMAN")

   Tom has stumbled upon a breathtaking set of codes
about the famous GREEN MAN of the ancients, the one
who taught the world agriculture.  It was not Adam, 
but Cain who did this, traveling the world as he who
was condemned to be a WANDERER, the original "Johnny
Appleseed" of myth, planting his "seed" wherever he
went.  Called by many names in the lands he "saved"
with his agricultural technology, Cain became a hero
to the pre-flood world.  Every culture recalls him.
His color was GREEN, not only for the GRAIN he grew,
but because he was also the lord of the DEAD, having
been the first to kill a man.

   Tom Mack found "EL GIYR" lurking in yet another
code.  Here are the designs he found this time:

   "EDOM" (where CAIN was born and still haunts)
   "BABEL" (the first land to which CAIN fled)
   "INDIA" (from which OSIRIS/CAIN came to Egypt)
   "SYRIA" (ASIR-ia linked to OSIRIS/"ASAR"=CAIN)
   "SATYR" (LILITH'S mate in EDOM: Is 34:14 =CAIN)

   CAIN is the one person who ties all these codes
together.  Son of Satan, the raging LION, CAIN is
also the SATYR GOAT, brother-mate of LILITH. They
are now haunting EDOM, Isaiah says. OSIRIS was said
to have come with ISIS/LILITH into Egypt out of the
land of INDIA, HIN'DI, H'NoD-ia, or The Land of NOD,
which were both geographically defined as all lands
east of the Great Rift Valley and the Jordan River.

   The legends of CAIN say that when he turned back 
and went WEST, past EDEN, into Egypt, he and his wife
LILITH/ISIS found the Nile Valley suffering famine, 
consumed with cannibalism.  He taught them to farm, 
then went on a world tour to establish a legacy for 
himself, hoping to change his "image" from that of a 
wandering killer to that of agricultural savior.  He 
would no more be seen as a CURSED BEAST, but as THE 

   When he returned to Egypt, he was cut in pieces
with the sword of Seth, his half-brother, out on a
mission to avenge Abel, whose heir he was. But ISIS
used witchcraft and enchantments to revive OSIRIS=
CAIN, in the body of her cloned son HORUS, born on
December 25th, the traditions claim.

   CAIN/OSIRIS was founder of the first of the seven
heads of the BEAST: Egypt. This head received a mortal
wound by sword, yet was healed by Thoth/Raphael under
ISIS's control.  He was the founder of the BEAST, yet
he is not now "alive," although he is preserved so he
can be revived, by the magical arts of Egypt. A twin
of CAIN, an Image of the BEAST, can be cloned again,
as with HORUS, and his spirit, which still haunts the
stones of EDOM, can take possession of this new body.

   The whole world would wonder at the BEAST CAIN, his
angelic, glowing face and Satanic horns, as he returns
to rule the earth again, and to inherit the throne of
his father RA, that is, Satan, the angel of MARS...


   Now that we have seen examples of a misconstrued
code and one that contains far more than initially
realized, it is time to look at a code that has both
factors at work:  The "MARS" code.

   To see the full code, go to pages 154 and 155 of 
"THE BIBLE CODE" by Michael Drosnin, the book that 
popularized the subject back in 1997.

   At first glance, Drosnin has found three separate
codes about three separate "comets" that he thinks are
going to hit the earth in 2006, 2010 and 2012.  But as
you examine the three designs Drosnin presents, notice
the Hebrew words in them:  They are all the same text!

   Moreover, the word he translates as "comet" appears 
but once in this design.  What makes it three events, 
or so he assumes, are the three dates.

   Now here's the curious part.  Right in the center of
the design, in the midst of the dates, is a seemingly
"out-of-place"--but unmistakeable--name:  "M-A-R-S."

   What is more scary is that the word "MARS" is crossed
by another unmistakaeable term:  "H-E-R-Tz" which is the
standard Hebrew spelling for "THE EARTH."

   Drosnin has not even noticed this intersection between
MARS and THE EARTH right in the midst of his design about
the years 2006, 2010, and 2012, even though "MARS" and 
"THE EARTH" are both but one letter from the date 2012.
Drosnin has a "collision" between two planets staring him
in the face and does not notice either word!

   What makes this all the more strange is that Drosnin
does find a confusing phrase he struggles to explain, but
includes anyway:

PIECES!"  This is found touching the date 2012.

   Now consider this:  The "skip" pattern for the letters
in "THE EARTH" matches this phrase exactly, while the skip
rate for "MARS" matches Drosnin's "COMET" exactly.

   The implication is that "THE EARTH" will tear "MARS"
to pieces, but that the "COMET" will "CRUMBLE" (FRACTURE?)
Mars and "DRIVE IT OUT" of orbit into the Earth's path,
where Mars will finally be destroyed when it is pulled 
apart by the Earth's gravity.

   One detail that sounds familiar:  When "THE EARTH" is
crossed by "MARS" in this design, Mars 'cuts off' exactly
a third of "EARTH"...  The Book of REVELATION, chapter 8,
describes an encounter with cosmic upheaval that shortens
the days by one-third.

   Crunched into that one-letter "gap" between the "MARS"
and "THE EARTH" designs and the date "2012" is the word:
"Y'KOB" ("JACOB"): The time of "Jacob's Trouble."

   Michael Drosnin may have found one of the most amazing
of all Bible codes, but he overlooked the most astonishing
part of it:  An immanent near-collision between the Earth
and the planet Mars that will destroy the Red Planet.

   Only time will tell if this code is valid, but what is
unsettling is that it fits so well into Bible prophecies
about the beginning of the Tribulation.

   For information on "THE SECRET HISTORY OF THE BIBLE"
click here.  

   [See links below for details about the "CHRISTMAS"
and "GREEN MAN" codes.]


Back to our News & Updates page and links
Not so fast... The word "Christmas" is NOT in this code, but "Shiloh" seems to be. It does seem to relate to the birth of Jesus, however.
Follow the links for the codes of Osiris, the Beast, Cain, Lucifer...
More tails along the trails of that fun couple, the horny twins, Lilith and Lucifer.
And you thought Cain was a vegetarian...
Want small fries with that? Martians are hungry critters...
Frankenstein: For the man that has everything but a son in his own image and likeness...
The pieces fit after all. Rethinking Genesis.
How are ya gonna keep Cain down on the farm after he's seen Memphis?
Documenting the exact date Jesus was born.
The East Gate, where the Tree of Life stood...