Contents of this page:
This pages discusses some of the reasons for, and the implications and consequences of, the fact that the sequence of the words, which have been established to have proceeded out of the mouth of God, cannot be guaranteed to be the correct sequence as shown in this document.

Choices among probable sequences:
On the basis of logic, some of the possible sequences are more probable than others. Despite the use of logic to determine which sequence is more probable than another, the choice of which order is more probable remains somewhat subjective. The choice of which sequence is more probable will therefore differ from one person to another.

Consequence of different sequences:
Some of the more probable sequences would have the same meanings as others, and some would not. For instance, "Son of God most high" does not have exactly the same meaning as "most high Son of God". Other such instances abound. One resolution of this particular instance would be to realize that both meanings might be equally valid. If that were to be true, the resolution would then read "most high Son of God most high".

Why wasn't the sequence in the most probable way in the beginning?
One reason is that the words, which have been established to have proceeded out of the mouth of God, were often originally presented in this document in the sequence which they had when they were discovered. Unfortunately, that sequence is not always correct because of the fact that the words, which have been established to have proceeded out of the mouth of God, have been broken and stirred by the process of the "leaven" being hidden in the words, which have been established to have proceeded out of the mouth of God. (The fact that "leaven" was hidden in the words, which have been established to have proceeded out of the mouth of God, was mentioned at paragraph 020.) Another reason that the words, which have been established to have proceeded out of the mouth of God, were not originally shown in their most probable sequence is that the words, which have been established to have proceeded out of the mouth of God, were originally shown too hastily in this document. That is to say, the words, which have been established to have proceeded out of the mouth of God, were not contemplated sufficiently before originally being shown in this document. A third reason is that not all of the words, which have been established to have proceeded out of the mouth of God, were discovered at the same time. (In fact, not all of the words, which proceeded out of the mouth of God, have been discovered yet, as of 2011-06-22.) One result, of the fact that some portions of the words, which have been established to have proceeded out of the mouth of God, were discovered at a later time, is that mistakes in the sequence are more easily noticed after discoveries of additional portions of the words, which have been established to have proceeded out of the mouth of God, have been made. A fourth reason is that more than one sequence is correct in some instances. One instance of a multiple sequence is the situation of the last sentence in paragraph 095 which belongs instead at the ends of paragraphs 096, 098 and 102. The reason, that the last sentence of paragraph 095 belongs at the ends of paragraphs 096, 098 and 102, is that the total duration of the fourth and the fifth figurative "days" will be shortened for the benefit of the "elect" instead of the total duration of the first, second and third figurative "days" being shortened for the benefit of the "elect". Although many other instances of a multiple sequence exist, they will not be mentioned. The reader of this document is therefore advised to be alert for the many other instances of a multiple sequence.

This page was last updated on 2011-06-22.