posted on Feb, 21 2009 @ 07:13 AM
One of my favorite sites other than Above Top Secret is a site called
The Illuminatus Observor. I
have been reading the Illuminatus Observor for about 8 months now and am almost always entertained. To me, Fetch is like a Jordan Maxwell on
steroids. IMO, Fetch bores into the various Occult fabrications while Maxwell just scratches the surface.
The last few articles at the Illuminatus Observor have been quite interesting.
His latest article called "
Rule of Colel and Shifts of
One" deals with how you can use codes in language to determine what he calls "a Setianist" or "Osirian" thoughtform.
I had never heard of the "Rule of Colel".
He draws attention to the use of the terms "Abraxas", "DIOS", and "INRI" and shows how the traditional definition of a "colel value" is not
accurate.
Utilizing the Rule of Colel set against mythology, the "shift of one" when comparing the Resurrected Sun God set against the Winter Solstice as
compared to the Spring Equinox reveals what could only be regarded as a disturbing corruption. This "shift in one" appears to be overt and planned
with the intended purpose to co-opt and corrupt. - Source -
The Illuminatus Observor, Rule of Colel and Shifts of
One
What "the Fetch" is saying is that words as INRI and DIOS are actually crafted using a concept called Gematria. He traces DIOS back to Abraxas in
that each word has a value of 365, while he shows that INRI has a value of 366, or a "Colel Value". Yet he differs from the traditional analysis
and does so in a rather insightful way.
He differs in his views from those expressed out there in that he claims as above that a Colel Value often shows a shift in the mythology.
You can hear his latest podcast on the
Rule of
Colelthrough his article or at his podcast "
Inside the Eye" or here:
A Google Search on "Rule of Colel" shows only 91 entries, so there is indeed very little reference on the Net. Anyone else hear of this concept and
does anyone else think that mythologies have mathematical formulas designed into them or their "sacred nomenclatures"?