It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


The Chronicle Project: Hidden Truths Revealed

page: 4
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in


posted on Aug, 11 2010 @ 08:55 PM
reply to post by OhZone

No, it's not the same, as far as I can see. Here's the link for Alef form your site:

Here's a link to the Chronicle Projects Aalaf: www....(nolink)/?dc669ccm7k2pvv9

They are very different to me. How 'bout you?

[edit on 8/11/10 by jennybee35]

posted on Aug, 27 2010 @ 12:27 AM
Okay, the Chronicle project team has updated their site with an English paraphrase version of some of Genesis. It is very easy to read and understand. Those of you who said that the original version was too hard to understand should go check it out. It's mind-blowing!

And for those who haven't checked out the video, go here:

[edit on 8/27/10 by jennybee35]

posted on Aug, 27 2010 @ 09:51 AM
I'm not finding much more about these people than any one else on here, but I thought I would post this comment that the head researcher of the project left on a message board where they were discussing the website much like we are now:

"Thanks for posting our stuff. I thought I would answer some of the questions. We discovered this stuff in 2007 and it took two years just to properly assemble the data. We then contacted over 200 "experts" and sent them our stuff. 200 experts shunned us. Then [..] got wind of our stuff and posted it. This is the first time we were given exposure about 5 months ago. Each letter is a word. You can find the list in the how to notes, which it appears the people here had problem understanding. We just posted a paraphrased version of the first book this morning so it doesn't sound like Yoda is talking."

Maybe my logic isn't sound, but if they really contacted 200 experts on the Hebrew language and were outright rejected by them.......... need I say more? From his own mouth, and quite telling, if you ask me.

posted on Aug, 31 2010 @ 10:26 AM
Hullo -this is my first post here - actually I was trying to find the Chronicle project webpage - and up popped your discussion - so why not stop by and say hi?

I have to say - I am not crazy about their video, to makes them seem less credible.
But reading what they have done and how they are working towards figuring stuff out is very impressive to me.
I see someone wonders why they don't just translate the entire bible - easy-peasy! They would love to - but they are only Seven people, they have families, they have to make dinner, ya know?
I know folks that don't even have time during the day to
balance their checkbook, and if you have time to figure it out - to prove them wrong or prove them right - go for it!

They are just looking for the truth. And they, like many of us here, believe that truth has been intentionally and/or accidently distorted.

They had an idea - they tested their theory, and it seems to work so far - they are still doing fine tuning - like any other experiment - so they put all their info out there - so that independent people would test the theory also and see if it pans out. Every radical concept is rejected by the experts of the day.
I hope they get a lot of people interested in their work and get more people to help out.

posted on Aug, 31 2010 @ 11:17 AM
reply to post by danzmali

Thanks much for your interest and comment! You should go check out the site today, Chris sent an e-mail and they have updated the site again with an English paraphrase of the the Book of Adam. If you haven't already, sign up for the monthly newsletter, that way you can know when they add new stuff!

As far as the youtube video goes, they were just trying to reach an audience that might never know about them otherwise. That is the same reason I posted all this on ATS, and sent links to Pimpin' Turtle, coast-to-coast, etc. Feel free to share anywhere you think appropriate!

posted on Sep, 7 2010 @ 12:06 AM
Here is the September newsletter from the project, a very good read!


Anyone interested in what they have to say should also go visit their website at:

Let me know what you think!

posted on Sep, 7 2010 @ 02:16 PM

Originally posted by one_man24We then contacted over 200 "experts" and sent them our stuff. 200 experts shunned us.

I think the proper word is probably "dismissed."

Maybe my logic isn't sound, but if they really contacted 200 experts on the Hebrew language and were outright rejected by them.......... need I say more? From his own mouth, and quite telling, if you ask me.

I can see why it would be dismissed. The Torah (Old Testament) was only compiled around 70 BC, and in cases where there are more than one copy of each of the books, there are differences in them. It also implies that Yahweh speaks Hebrew and that Hebrew hasn't changed (it has) and that all languages spring from Hebrew (they didn't.) It seems to adhere to the belief that the Old Testament just somehow fell out of the heavens, intact, and immediately became THE Book.

Also not true.

So I can see where they'd be rejected by linguists and historians. Bible scholars would have some very harsh criticisms of it because their research is all done around Strong's concordance with no knowledge of the language and no understanding of how the books came together or whose version became the "official" one.

posted on Sep, 7 2010 @ 02:26 PM
reply to post by Byrd

Byrd, did you study their info on the way they have translated the text? I don't remember them stating that they only used the Strong's.

Edit to add: I have asked Chris and the team to come here and rebut some of these things that I don't have the knowledge to handle. Hopefully they can answer some of these issues!

[edit on 9/7/10 by jennybee35]

posted on Sep, 7 2010 @ 02:31 PM
Just because everything we've ever been told may be lies. It is best not to believe what we hear on the internet, read on the books etc etc.

Most of us have two ears, two eyes, two parts of brain and all the other instruments at our service, then let's use them and find the truth by ourselves.

That'll be my advice. I myself try to live by it


[edit on 8-9-2010 by v01i0]

posted on Sep, 7 2010 @ 02:34 PM
reply to post by v01i0

Exactly! If anyone feels that this info is not for them, then it's not. It has always been up to each individual to judge for themselves what is true. I simply wanted to present info that I find not only very revealing, but also true. Everyone that wants to participate is welcome, because the more eyes that see and brains that work on it, the better!

posted on Sep, 7 2010 @ 04:50 PM
I have also been following the work of the Chronicle Project for some time now. I also suggest that anyone who is interested in this work should definately read the "How To" section of the website, as this language system is a little different than most, and the self-defining aspect of it is very interesting. I am still on the fence as to the veracity of the claims made by Chris and the other members, but on an intuitive level, I feel they are on the up and up. I can see no good reason to fake this stuff, and it doesn't surprise me in the least that no experts would take a serious look at it. If verified, this info would cause some MAJOR issues with most organized religions, and we all know how resistant to change they are! I, too, would like to hear from someone with some linguistic background. The fact that if a definition of a single word is incorrect, the whole phrase falls apart hints at an origin that I'm not sure if ancient peoples were capable of. But, I'm no expert! Thanks for posting this! I had planned to at some point, but hadn't gotten around to it yet.

posted on Sep, 7 2010 @ 05:54 PM
reply to post by dontaskme

You're welcome!! I also feel this info to be true. I have e-mailed Chris and hope to hear back from him this afternoon. If he is willing to, I want him to join ATS and answer some of these issues that I'm not knowledgeable enough to deal with.

You are absolutely right in that the "established" linguists, as well as established religion will not let this be legitimized readily. It puts so many of their doctrine and teachings in the dust. It could be the start of a whole new phase of humanity, if it were to be readily available and proven legitimate.

posted on Sep, 7 2010 @ 06:56 PM
reply to post by Byrd

Byrd, I received an answer from Chris. This is what he said to reply, and I quote (with permission of course)

Gentleman, What I posted is just research. Its the discovery of an embedded system in the Hebrew language. We didn't put it there, we just found it. Its like math. 2 plus 2 equals four, not 5 or 7 or any other number. This system does the same thing for Hebrew. What's there is now evident and how you deal with it is your choice. Chris Tyreman Research Head The Chronicle Project

So, if you really have reviewed all of the evidence, understand how the system works, have tried translating some yourself, and still think it is
junk, well, you tried your hardest to make it work, right?

I mean, it's not like you have a personal problem with this, is it? So, as a moderator, I expect that you have been very thorough in your research that led you to dismiss The Chronicle project as useless. Otherwise, you wouldn't have earned the moderator title. That is what I am putting faith in, that you are being fair and even when you dismiss this, because there will be many that will take one look at a moderator's response in this thread and automatically take your word as gospel truth. Just be sure that what you say is the truth, please.

This could potentially be a HUGE issue in the very near future, if it is proven to be legitimate. There may many who are to receive the truth of this, but who would hesitate to research it on their own if your response is negative.

posted on Sep, 7 2010 @ 08:24 PM
Okay, I hate that all of these replies are my own, but here is some more info from Chris Tyreman:

Just a note on how we find a word: Lets take the word Shem as it is found in the bible. Strong's says it is a name, a sign, etc. The reason we mention strong's at all, is because people need a frame of reference. The strong's allow them to go see the spelling etc. The strong's also has all of the placements of the word in the Bible. This is handy as is the Young's literal concordance for finding placement. So first we go to our list and look up what each letter means for shem, which is. In the SDH it is To Project, raised up. These are motions that you can do. So do that, project your arm(s) and raise them up. What are you doing? Where we come from, that's how you get attention. So the word Shem, is to get attention. This is what we mean by self defining. Now we look up in the young's and strong's every definition of that word. Why, because it contains all of the variant definitions used for that word. Sometimes they are dead wrong, some times they are right, but not completely accurate. Now if you look up all of the different uses, it can all be covered with the single definition: To draw attention to.... What does a name do A sign do etc. So we use other material as reference, because it saves the footwork. But sometimes they are just dead wrong and then we spend hours researching all of the placements to find the accurate word. So next time someone says we use the strong's, give them this letter to clarify.

So, there is much more info to help you determine how this SDH works. If you try it, you'll like it!!

posted on Sep, 15 2010 @ 08:49 PM
The team has updated the site again with some paraphrased english versions of some of their work It's a lot easier to read and understand. Try it, you'll like it!!

posted on Sep, 17 2010 @ 04:18 AM
hmmm.... very interesting indeed. a question comes to mind if the dead sea scrolls themself are to be trusted. i'm not an expert, just common sense tells me that received text is to be the most accurate text we got.

here's some great presentation on that topic: BATTLE OF THE BIBLES


posted on Sep, 19 2010 @ 03:46 PM
I know little of the subject, except the theory that J and E were the original sources for the first five books of the Bible, although no one has the originals. Then other books were added and edited over time, redacted, translated into Greek and Latin, then into the vernacular languages during the Protestant Reformation.

Quite a few books were added, revised or left out over 1,000 years or more, and even the four Gospels were based on earlier sources like Q. There was also an Aramaic Gospel of Jesus that didn't end up in the final version, although it was closest to what Jesus really said and did during his lifetime.

posted on Sep, 19 2010 @ 04:16 PM
reply to post by ExPostFacto

I think these touch on the same thing -

For all the nations have drunk
the maddening wine of her adulteries.
The kings of the earth committed adultery with her,
and the merchants of the earth grew rich from her excessive luxuries.

the women represent two covenants. One covenant is from Mount Sinai

posted on Sep, 19 2010 @ 04:16 PM
IMHO...the video damaged their I the only one that seems to realise that a majority of religous beliefs are altered versions of Egyptian or Sumerian beliefs....that includes stories in the Torah, Bible...ect. To me if you want to find the "Truth" the ancients...not peoples constant retellings of events. Try to get close to the source as possible. IMHO of course.

posted on Sep, 19 2010 @ 04:18 PM
Hebrew is a remarkable language.

Ive been studying it for the past few years, kabbalistically, and it not like any other language.

Even trying to translate certain words from Hebrew into English (or any language for that matter) can be very hard. The concepts simply do not exist in other languages.

And studying gematria, the level of numbers, reflects Hebrews archetypal quantitative makeup, whereas studying Hebrew from a grammatical angle allows you to appreciate its qualitative nature. The 'number' being a distinct archetype with a specific purpose and role given to it from the creator, and the grammatical root drawing words back to their essential division.

Its a remarkably profound subject only for the philosophically inclined.

new topics

top topics

<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in