Contents of this page:
This page contains a mention of the sort of riddle which all of the essential words of the most high God were discovered to be.

What sort of a riddle is it?:
The words, which were confirmed to be the essential words of the most high God, were discovered to be a riddle (or a puzzle) of the sort which might best be called a "parallelism". One way to summarize this sort of a riddle would be to say that it consists of a collection of comparisons. Each comparison can be either a comparison of the similarity of some items; or it can be a comparison of the contrast of some items. In the case of a comparison of the similarity of some items, both halves of the comparison must be explicitly written. In the case of a comparison of the contrast of some items, merely one half of the contrast must be written because it is always possible to construct the other half of the contrast from the half which is explicitly written.

An example of a similarity:
One example of a comparison of the similarities of some items is the portion of the essential testimony at http://thisgoodriddle.com/established-details/006.htm That portion reads, "Mary was espoused to Joseph, and she brought forth her firstborn son and called his name Jesus." Our first step should be to examine this portion in order to discover if any words were omitted because they were repetitive words. If we were to insert the omitted repetitive words into this portion; then it would read, "Mary was espoused to Joseph, and she brought forth her firstborn son and [she] called his name Jesus." This portion mentions three actions. The first action was that Mary was espoused. The second action was that Mary brought forth a son. The third action was that Mary called her son a name. So the question becomes: are these three actions similarities or are they contrasts? To find an answer to this question, let us consider the fact that these three actions are a sequence of actions. Mary could not call her son a name until after she had brought forth her son and thereby knew that she had brought forth a son instead of a daughter. Mary could not bring forth either a son or a daughter until she was espoused. We therefore realize that the sequence of actions forms a process. The parts of that process are therefore similarities to each other instead of contrasts to each other. So we can say that the action of espousal is similar to the action of bring forth a child; and we can further say that the action of bringing forth a child is similar to the action of naming a child. We could summarize these relationships by using the symbol "~" as a substitute for the word "similarity". After we were to use this symbol; then the similarities would look like this: espousal ~ bring-forth-child ~ name-child.

An example of a contrast:
One example of the comparison of the contrast between some items is the portion of the essential testimony at http://thisgoodriddle.com/established-details/019-a.htm  That portion reads, "And if thy hand, thy foot, offend thee, cut it off. It is better for thee to enter into life halt, maimed, than having two hands, two feet, to be cast into hell, into the fire that [is] never quenched." As always, our first step should be to examine this portion in order to discover if any words were omitted because they were repetitive words. If we were to insert the omitted repetitive words into this portion; then it would read, "And if thy hand, thy foot, offend thee, cut it off. It is better for thee to enter into life halt, maimed, than [for thee] having two hands, two feet, to be cast into hell, [for thee to be cast] into the fire that [is] never quenched." Although an inspection of this portion reveals that several similarities are mentioned, let us focus on the contrast which is the contrast of the phrase "enter into life" with the phrase "cast into Hell". We could summarize this contrast by using the symbol "≠" as a substitute for the word "contrast". After we were to use this symbol; then the contrast would look like this: enter-into-life ≠ cast-into-Hell.

An example of solving:
As to solving the riddles, it’s easy to do; it merely takes some time. Let me show you an example. Let’s say that one of the little riddles makes a comparison of similarity between two items. Let’s call those items A and B. Then let’s say that another of the little riddles, somewhere else in the big riddle, makes a comparison between B and C. We therefore know that A is similar to C, although we never saw a comparison between A and C.

If we keep track of the comparisons, pretty soon we will have a big long list of things that are similar. For instance, the first three entries in our list might look like this:

A ~ B ~ C

J ~ H

U ~ V

But comparisons are not always of similarities. Sometimes, they are comparisons of contrasts instead. For instance, a comparison might contrast C and D. We could abbreviate that to C ≠ D. And, when we went to add that to our list, we would see that our list already says that A ~ B ~ C. So we could add our latest discovery to that entry, like this: A ~ B ~ C ≠ D.

Looking at that (A ~ B ~ C ≠ D), we immediately realize that not only is D a contrast to C, it is also a contrast to A and to B. Then, later on, let us say that we find a little riddle that shows that D is similar to E. Even later, we find another little riddle that shows that E is similar to F. So when we write all of this in the entry, it becomes: A ~ B ~ C ≠ D ~ E ~ F.

So then we can ask ourselves, "What is it that is similar to A, B, and C; but contrasts to D, E, and F?" If we can’t figure that out yet, then we just keep making the list of similarities and contrasts. Sooner or later, we will have a big enough list about items related to A, B, C, D, E, and F that we will be able to say, "Aha! I’ve got it! K is similar to A, B and C, and contrasted to D, E and F." In fact, we can sometimes say that, even if K is never mentioned in any of the comparisons.

A word of caution:
One particular parallelism on the homepage is pointed out to be the starting place by the fact that it is emphasized above all others. This word of caution is necessary because I did not originally notice the emphasis and therefore started elsewhere, with the result that I soon became bogged down in a morass of comparisons which were only distantly related. A restart at the indicated parallelism resulted in smooth progress. Difficult, to be sure; but smooth.

As to the extent of difficulty, some puzzles are of the 6-minute sort, while others are of the 60-minute sort. On that scale, "This Good Riddle" would have to be rated as being at least of the 600,000-minute sort. However, that rating would be for total solution. Partial solution is possible, even inevitable, with the result that it is similar to a trail of bread crumbs in which the crumbs become increasingly larger as the riddle is increasingly solved. So the riddle is noticeably easier at the 60,000-minute level than at the 600-minute level.

Sincerely hoping that you find the solution to be as interesting and beneficial as I am finding it to be.

Note:
Contact: Rosemarie Mcaffee on Facebook at https://www.facebook.com/rosemarie.mcaffee

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This page was most recently modified on 2011-10-07.