Jump to content


- - - - -

Bible Codes Revisited


  • Please log in to reply
39 replies to this topic

#1 Guest_d&c_*

Guest_d&c_*
  • Guests

Posted 16 April 2004 - 09:50 AM

I was a cynic of the Bible codes stuff until I read an independent study by my friend [and brother in the Lord] Lyuben Piperov of Bulgaria. You can view it at

link

The math is a bit hard going but it seems to me that he is really onto something wonderful.

#2 Fortigurn

Fortigurn

    Omega

  • Christadelphian MD
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 34,244 posts

Posted 16 April 2004 - 10:02 AM

Is there any independent verification of this work? :eek:

Preferably the standard doubleblind by disinterested third parties. :clap2:
Miserere mei Deus,
Secundum magnam misericordiam tuam.
Et secundum multitudinem miserationum tuarum
dele iniquitatem meam.

______________________________________________________________________
target="_blank">I am a Christadelphian. Click here to see my confession of faith.
______________________________________________________________________
‘John Wesley once received a note which said, “The Lord has told me to tell you that He doesn’t need your book-learning, your Greek, and your Hebrew.”

Wesley answered “Thank you, sir. Your letter was superfluous, however, as I already knew the Lord has no need for my ‘book-learning,’ as you put it. However—although the Lord has not directed me to say so—on my own responsibility I would like to say to you that the Lord does not need your ignorance, either.”

Osborne & Woodward, ‘Handbook for Bible study’, pp. 13-14 (1979)

______________________________________________________________________
target="_blank">Apologetics

#3 Guest_d&c_*

Guest_d&c_*
  • Guests

Posted 16 April 2004 - 11:18 AM

not that I know of

#4 Fortigurn

Fortigurn

    Omega

  • Christadelphian MD
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 34,244 posts

Posted 16 April 2004 - 11:19 AM

I was a cynic of the Bible codes stuff until I read an independent study by my friend [and brother in the Lord] Lyuben Piperov of Bulgaria. You can view it at

link

The math is a bit hard going but it seems to me that he is really onto something wonderful.

d&c

See what I mean? :bye:
Miserere mei Deus,
Secundum magnam misericordiam tuam.
Et secundum multitudinem miserationum tuarum
dele iniquitatem meam.

______________________________________________________________________
target="_blank">I am a Christadelphian. Click here to see my confession of faith.
______________________________________________________________________
‘John Wesley once received a note which said, “The Lord has told me to tell you that He doesn’t need your book-learning, your Greek, and your Hebrew.”

Wesley answered “Thank you, sir. Your letter was superfluous, however, as I already knew the Lord has no need for my ‘book-learning,’ as you put it. However—although the Lord has not directed me to say so—on my own responsibility I would like to say to you that the Lord does not need your ignorance, either.”

Osborne & Woodward, ‘Handbook for Bible study’, pp. 13-14 (1979)

______________________________________________________________________
target="_blank">Apologetics

#5 Guest_Johanan_*

Guest_Johanan_*
  • Guests

Posted 16 April 2004 - 01:09 PM

D&C,

To those who do not know much stats, things like the Bible Code and Panin's work can seem very impressive. Sadly they are not.

This page is a good start to see why Bible Codes are not true.

This page shows how things can be found in any text (e.g. Moby Dick).

Edited by Johanan, 16 April 2004 - 02:05 PM.


#6 Fortigurn

Fortigurn

    Omega

  • Christadelphian MD
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 34,244 posts

Posted 16 April 2004 - 01:17 PM

This page is a good start to see why Bible Codes are true.

I think you meant not true. :bye:
Miserere mei Deus,
Secundum magnam misericordiam tuam.
Et secundum multitudinem miserationum tuarum
dele iniquitatem meam.

______________________________________________________________________
target="_blank">I am a Christadelphian. Click here to see my confession of faith.
______________________________________________________________________
‘John Wesley once received a note which said, “The Lord has told me to tell you that He doesn’t need your book-learning, your Greek, and your Hebrew.”

Wesley answered “Thank you, sir. Your letter was superfluous, however, as I already knew the Lord has no need for my ‘book-learning,’ as you put it. However—although the Lord has not directed me to say so—on my own responsibility I would like to say to you that the Lord does not need your ignorance, either.”

Osborne & Woodward, ‘Handbook for Bible study’, pp. 13-14 (1979)

______________________________________________________________________
target="_blank">Apologetics

#7 Fortigurn

Fortigurn

    Omega

  • Christadelphian MD
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 34,244 posts

Posted 16 April 2004 - 02:03 PM

A brother who is a programmer and has some good mathematics knowledge contributed the following critique of this paper:

The paper is not mathematics, and definitely commits the usual "Bible code" fallacies. I'm afraid it doesn't hold up. See below for some reasons.

  •   The biggest fallacy is that of selecting occurrences that fit his thesis, and then, a posteriori, calculating probabilities as if they were a priori--in other words, pretending that the event hadn't already happened.

    To explain this: the same reasoning turns any coincidence into a miracle; you notice that you, your boss, and his daughter all have the same birthday and initials, and ask, "What are the odds of that happening?"

    In reality there are an infinite number of coincidences that _haven't_ occurred, but this one has. In any situation, if you look carefully, you will find an interesting coincidence or three. But if you hunt it up first, you can't then talk about the odds of its happening--the chance of _some_ coincidence happening is 100%, and the chance that it would be the one you found isn't relevant, because you would have asked the same question if you had found a completely different coincidence.



  •   In addition, he uses the modern spellings of the modern names of the countries, which is certainly a debatable decision. Later in his paper he mentions ancient names for some european countries, but I can't tell if he is switching between the ancient and modern names in his analysis. If he is, then this also invalidates his experiment.
    It is necessary to pick a spelling and stick with it--otherwise one is simply creating as large a space of coincidences as possible, and then cherry picking what actually happens.



  •   On "cherry picking", he notices that the baltic states need to be excluded to strengthen his conclusion--and then offers a rationalization why they should be excluded!



  •   He also credits a word as "intersecting" Israel if it contains a letter before or after Israel in the Bible. Adding in "near misses" strongly smells of a posteriori tampering, but even if it isn't, the decision to count them as "intersections" is arbitrary and not defensible.



  •   His decision to exclude "small states" is likewise arbitrary and not defensible.



  •   Particularly damning is his inclusion of numerous words other than "Israel". This goes way beyond his experimental design, and strongly suggests that he searched for coincidences before designing his experiment around what he found. This is often done, including by all Bible Codes researches, without an intent to deceive: they believe they are "examining the data" and "forming an hypothesis", in all good faith.

    But in effect they present the data afterward as if it were a test of their theory's predictive power--which it isn't, since the observations are all "after the fact". It's the same as the first fallacy in this list: they went hunting for interesting coincidences, and no matter what coincidences they find, they will then publish a  paper which reads as if they were looking for THAT coincidence, when they really weren't.



  •   His classification of "safe" and "risky" states seems to make Denmark a safe state with no particular basis except the author's conviction that the Jews would have "felt safer" there, and similarly makes Latvia, Palestine, the Vatican, Estonia and Lithuania "risky" states despite the lack of a death toll there.

    Absence of an objective standard of "riskiness" makes this a fertile area to re-classify states a posteriori, which would of course make the entire experiment invalid. (It is impossible to know whether this was done, because it boils down to the question, "Did you pick the countries before or after performing your experiment?")



  •   His paper is not actually organized like a mathematics paper, so it's very hard for me to actually determine what theory he is advancing. In particular, the "entropy-like function" of which he speaks is still far from clear to me. He states facts without explaining the connections between them, or even what it is that he is trying to prove.

    That said, the "entropy function" looks like another fertile area to introduce after the fact "fudge factors".


:bye:

Edited by Fortigurn, 16 April 2004 - 02:05 PM.

Miserere mei Deus,
Secundum magnam misericordiam tuam.
Et secundum multitudinem miserationum tuarum
dele iniquitatem meam.

______________________________________________________________________
target="_blank">I am a Christadelphian. Click here to see my confession of faith.
______________________________________________________________________
‘John Wesley once received a note which said, “The Lord has told me to tell you that He doesn’t need your book-learning, your Greek, and your Hebrew.”

Wesley answered “Thank you, sir. Your letter was superfluous, however, as I already knew the Lord has no need for my ‘book-learning,’ as you put it. However—although the Lord has not directed me to say so—on my own responsibility I would like to say to you that the Lord does not need your ignorance, either.”

Osborne & Woodward, ‘Handbook for Bible study’, pp. 13-14 (1979)

______________________________________________________________________
target="_blank">Apologetics

#8 Guest_Johanan_*

Guest_Johanan_*
  • Guests

Posted 16 April 2004 - 02:06 PM

This page is a good start to see why Bible Codes are true.

I think you meant not true. :bye:

Oops!

I fixed it.

#9 Adanac

Adanac

    Omega

  • On Vacation
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,886 posts

Posted 16 April 2004 - 02:11 PM

Forget those nasty Bible codes. The Bible has a true code all of its own. Proper Bible study is far more exciting than those codes.
Housework has been a snap since I realized... "Hey! I'm a guy!".

#10 Fortigurn

Fortigurn

    Omega

  • Christadelphian MD
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 34,244 posts

Posted 16 April 2004 - 02:15 PM

Forget those nasty Bible codes. The Bible has a true code all of its own. Proper Bible study is far more exciting than those codes.

Absolutely. I doubt that God wrote the Bible for computer programmers. :bye:
Miserere mei Deus,
Secundum magnam misericordiam tuam.
Et secundum multitudinem miserationum tuarum
dele iniquitatem meam.

______________________________________________________________________
target="_blank">I am a Christadelphian. Click here to see my confession of faith.
______________________________________________________________________
‘John Wesley once received a note which said, “The Lord has told me to tell you that He doesn’t need your book-learning, your Greek, and your Hebrew.”

Wesley answered “Thank you, sir. Your letter was superfluous, however, as I already knew the Lord has no need for my ‘book-learning,’ as you put it. However—although the Lord has not directed me to say so—on my own responsibility I would like to say to you that the Lord does not need your ignorance, either.”

Osborne & Woodward, ‘Handbook for Bible study’, pp. 13-14 (1979)

______________________________________________________________________
target="_blank">Apologetics

#11 Grace

Grace

    Sigma

  • Christadelphian MD
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,505 posts

Posted 17 April 2004 - 08:35 PM

Hehe. {--Dave in his next Devil debate--}

"Now, in Moby Dick chapter 4, line two, it says..." :bye:
"Common sense and a sense of humor are the same thing, moving at different speeds. A sense of humor is just common sense, dancing."

William James

#12 Interpretum

Interpretum

    Omicron

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 450 posts

Posted 18 April 2004 - 11:23 PM

Hi Guys

Forget the "Michael Drosnin" kind of Bible codes, in which he views 4 letter words as significant.

Here's a fascinating link to a site that has done much more research into Bible codes, and have found much more statistically viable ones:

http://www.biblecodedigest.com

It's true that you can find fairly simple codes in texts such as Moby Dick... but the probability of a code reduces as the size of a code increases. The longest one found so far in the Bible (at the above site) is 73 letters long. Michael Drosnin's pitiful codes barely reach past 10 letters!

Don't completely write off Bible codes just yet, folks :-) The God of the Universe who created every single quark, atom, compound, planet, star and galaxy... might also be capable of creating some additional miracles in His Inspired Word.

#13 Guest_d&c_*

Guest_d&c_*
  • Guests

Posted 20 April 2004 - 12:12 PM

Brother Lyuben replies to you as follows:

Dear Brothers and Sisters,

To the best of my judgment on your hot reactions on my study, most of you are young people. It is very good to defend your faith. I remember myself (and now I feel shame) being even arrogant when, long ago, I was defending my belief in the Lord Jesus before atheists. It was this experience, which taught me in apologetics and how to use different approaches when encounter different personalities. All the more, I lived in a communist country until 1989. There were people who didn’t believe in God at all. So, in order to preach the Gospel, I had to persuade them to believe that the world is not a product of the blind chance but is masterly designed by God. I usually failed in my attempts. The blind chance is something adored by the enemies of God.

It is not the case with you. We share the same faith and the same basic principles of understanding of the universe. That is why I will not hesitate to give some explanations in order to avoid misunderstandings.

I am a highly educated person and claim some scientific background. I also believe in the Lord Jesus since 1971. It was at that time when I realized what “created in the image of God” means. This means that the gracious God gifted us with a part of His own abilities to be creators. Not only this – He also made us able to evaluate creatures and creations. But evaluation means distinguishing between two or more alternatives. God has made this basic characteristic of His obvious by distinguishing between light and darkness in the very beginning. Since then, the God’s acts are distinguishable in every aspect. For this purpose, He endowed us with reason, or intelligence, to a certain limit. But a basic characteristic of all us the humans, especially after the original sin, is the susceptibility to delusions. The latter could be avoided not by reason alone but only if the LORD gift us with His Spirit. The Spirit cannot be taken or bought with money but only received as a free gift.

Because the enemies of God by no means can get this Gift, they have two alternatives: to deny the existence of God and consequently His Spirit or to state that the Spirit has nothing to do with cognition. The latter alternative led to the widely accepted nowadays belief that there are two separate regions within each individual and even a division of the human personality taken as a whole: the world of the reality, which is cognitive through the laws of physics and the psychic inner world of every human – the world of the feelings and the irrational. There, they say, is the religion, which everyone chooses according to his or her own taste. Hence, religion has nothing to do with reality! From there to the cry: “There is no God!” is just one step.

This division could be perceived in the world today. It brings a psychological strain, which destroys personalities and people go mad in large numbers. It is a kind of schizophrenia (split mind, in Greek).

My belief is that it is not so with the children of God – that is, the believers in the Lord Jesus. We are integral persons and I suppose that this is what the Lord Jesus had in mind when told His disciples “But he that endureth to the end, the same shall be saved” (Matt. 24:13).

So our approach should reflect our integrity. This approach includes also impartiality. I claim that my own approach to the Bible codes is such. If the Bible is the Word of God, it will be distinguished in any feature from anything created by man. In the course of the ages, this uniqueness claimed by both Jewish rabbis and Christians has been callously ridiculed by atheists. Of course, the means of the apologists matched those of the offenders. I remember the time when every now and then were printed books which “invalidated” the Bible “fables”. Communists even denied that Jesus of Nazareth did exist at all. Their “evidences” were based on “linguistic scrutiny”. How perverted their reasoning was you may see from the following example.

If the Bible appeared to be the only source for a given event, they said that no such event had taken place because there are no other sources to mention it. That is, the Bible is full of fabricated stories. On the other hand, in the cases where there are references in other sources (e.g. the Gilgamesh story about the Flood, written in cuneiform script and discovered relatively late – in the late XVIII – early XIX centuries and even later), they claimed that the Bible is a compilation of other sources, this time without any comment on whether the newly discovered source is full of fabricated stories or not. Moreover, they always argue that it is the Bible which is the later text. So the Bible has ever been under attack.

The computer era provided our generation with a powerful means of calculation. There appeared a new battlefield between the enemies of God and us. The battlefield in question is the Bible codes (mainly the Torah codes). The major weapon of the atheists is a pseudo-scientific terminology. They try to infect the minds of the public with it. “Purity of the experiment”, “a posteriori calculation of probabilities”, etc. are regularly used meaningless phrases that are used to demonstrate erudition. They don’t know that it is the Sabbath that was made for the man and not the man for the Sabbath. These are just means and as such should be used appropriately. I will give you an example in a critical note: there a Brother or Sister requires a “standard doubleblind” (probably experiment).

The term “double-blind experiment” was introduced in the sixties or early seventies in the clinical pharmacy for a specific reason. The evaluation of the effectiveness of a certain medicine is usually carried out in the following manner. Two groups of approximately equal numbers of patients are specified. The patients should be also of about the same health condition. One group is given placebo, while the other one is given the active drug. After finishing the treatment, the results obtained with the groups are statistically processed in order to be made a comparison of the groups and hence the effectiveness of the drug to be established.

It has been observed that the results are largely influenced by the personality of the doctor or the nurse, who is in direct contact with the patient. The explanation was found and it was in the unconscious exchange of information between a doctor or a nurse, who knows whether the drug to be taken by the patient is active, or placebo, and the patient. Thus, the patient got an idea what was given. So the pharmacists began to mark with codes that only they knew the two groups of medicines.

Furthermore, it has been proved that even the pharmacist, who gives the marked units, passes information to the doctor at the moment of the direct contact between them. That is why, a procedure of handling the medicines was established, in which there is no direct contact between the pharmacist and the doctor, i.e. both the doctor (or nurse) and the patient are to be “blinded”.

As far as I am aware, blinding is contra-indicative in Bible studies and has nothing to do with experiments of the kind discussed here. However, as a fashion, the term may have been borrowed. In this case, my experiment is “fourteen-fold-blind” experiment. I have checked the intersections with ISRAEL against thirteen other words.

I can also ask this Brother or Sister what does he/she mean by “disinterested party” – atheists, or mathematicians who do not know about the Holocaust?

Another claim of this Brother or Sister is an “independent verification”. Just one more meaningless phrase of the atheists’ arsenal. Let me consider the word “independent” first. This implies a third party, who must check two (or more) groups of results obtained by two (or more) teams or persons, who submit results of significant discrepancy. This should mean that someone else has discovered another method or code, so the independent jury must decide whose result is more plausible.

The word “verification” illustrates another missing of point. Results of this kind (not only my own work) can only be DISPROVED. They can never be PROVED. Even more, any CONFIRMATION in this particular case is meaningless. (Unless someone suspects me as a liar or thinks that I may have recorded the displayed results erroneously.) How? Just by finding another word, which gives better results than the results submitted by me. It is another question whether this word must have something to do with the Holocaust or the establishment of the state of Israel. You may try with any of the 225 = 5,153,632 5-letter permutations in the Torah. (Israel is a 5-letter word in Hebrew.) I have tried with several of them. Or you may choose shorter words. The 4-letter permutations are only 234,256. Suppose you find a word that gives a better separation. What of that? Ah, wait. What about the year 693? Or the intersection that produces the lowest P? I haven’ included them in the calculation of the probability. If I have included them too, the overall probability would have been 10-10…

As you see, I can also boast with infinitesimally small probabilities. I did not include this figure not in order to humble myself deliberately but just because I am writing to believers. Could anybody of you say that he or she would believe if the probability is, say, 1/1,000,000, but wouldn’t believe in case it is “only”, say, 1/10,000? In my own opinion, statistics and probabilities are only to support the experimenter’s idea. Hunt for low probabilities is a vanity.

Low probabilities have their own history. The search for Bible codes started about 20 years ago. At that time, powerful computers were unavailable for the general public. Access to such computers had highly professional mathematicians or physicists only. They designed the experiments in accordance with their professional codex and used specific language to discuss the results. The enemies of God were just waiting for this. They welcomed the sophisticated terminology and turned it to juggling words. From that time remained the language, thence used by many (from both sides), who do not have the professional background and relevant experience. As a result, mimicking competence in proofs and (mostly!) refutations by inappropriate usage of this language is widely spread fashion today.

People regard mathematics as something perfect. This is not so. There are three main schools in mathematics: formalists, constructivists and intuitionists. They do not quarrel on 2 + 2 = ? level but have significant disagreements about matters like infinity or methods and criteria for proof. This is also valid for statistics. There are disputes on pro and con Bayesian approach…

In the light of the limitations of our minds, we develop different methods for study of the creation. Statistical parameters are such set of terms and notions. They are to be used properly in accordance with the particular needs. No tool is to be used without adequate necessity. I do not recommend it to anybody to become a bondservant to a hollow form without filling.

If you do not believe me about the enemies of God, consider this. Suppose these codes have been found not in the Bible but in another scripture or book(s) written by a modern author. I am absolutely certain that the resistance wouldn’t be so fierce. Why? Because, the Bible in general, and the Torah in particular, are declared to be the Word of God. I believe that here lays the major cause that makes atheists so furious. For centuries, the Rabbis claimed that there is information hidden in the Torah. This was in times when no one on Earth had even the idea that one day such thing as a computer will exist. It is this motivation that made generations of scribes to copy the Torah so carefully, that there are only 6 differences among 304,805 letters between the 2 editions of the Torah! Why did they know that one day it will be so important? The existence of codes is claimed about the Torah mostly and they are found there mostly. This is a fact. Even the unbelievers are aware that the Torah is the touchstone for any hidden codes. How it happened that the most carefully handed down document appeared to be also the most authentic source of hidden concrete information? The Torah is standing alone against all the documents ever written by man.

This fact also casts light on another pseudo-scientific claim: that of “a priori determination of the parameters of the experiment”. It is a good excuse for double standards. It is reasonable, of course, when you plan an experiment, which can yield several outcomes and you must outline the one you are interested in against any other result. It is also useful for the experimenter in order to be able to trace back every step of the development, which can allow him to make changes in each phase instead of starting always from the beginning. It is absolutely inapplicable to discoveries. To repudiate a discovery on the grounds of improperly set experiment is laughable. You either agree or disagree. In the latter case, you either undertake your own research or just say nothing. You cannot blame the author that he didn’t know in advance what he will find in an experiment. Could we say that Columbus has nothing to do with the exploration of the Americas on the grounds that he thought he has reached India? In the same way, I must be a super-genius to be able to predict everything I have found. I just had the vague idea that somehow the countries where Jews have been protected during the Holocaust could be outlined against the other ones and that the key to the code somehow is linked to the name Israel in the plain text. To my own surprise, it turned to be so.

The PCs available currently are as powerful as those used in the first experiments in Bible codes. Now any researcher has the freedom of choice in designing the experiment. Bible codes are still terra incognita. The enemies of God have always tried to strangle every new development, which could reveal the power of God. It was so at the time of translation of the Bible into vernacular European languages about 500 years ago. Remember that William Tyndale was executed because he dared to translate the Bible into English. Possession of Bibles had been banned by the Catholic Church for centuries. The technology of printing aided to defeat this ignorance. Later, believers have been ridiculed in the fields of archaeology, comparative linguistics, paleontology, even astronomy (although the gravity law was discovered by Sir Isaac Newton, the ardent believer in the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob and Father of the Lord Jesus, as well as dedicated Bible codes researcher!). And what about the devilish din made by the atheists on the evolution some 150 years ago? The faith of many naïve believers was shaken due to the pseudo-scientific claims that the creation by God has been disproved. Now, a number of even non-qualified in biology but unbiased people will say that the creation described in Genesis, chapter 1, has more to do with science than Darwinism. Everywhere the enemies of God were defeated. The modern science itself is a product and effect of these battles.

I dare think that the availability of relatively powerful computers will allow a more intuitive approach instead of the dry, strict methodology used so far. This requires abundant general culture, mostly knowledge of history. Combined with interests and basics in data processing, it could make some of you discoverers. It is a real pleasure to feel that you know something nobody else on Earth knows yet.

In conclusion, I will tell you my own concept of the Bible codes. It is something like imprints on banknotes. They do not increase or decrease banknotes’ values. They just certify their authenticity. In the same way, the codes authenticate the Word of God.

Let God bless you all.

Much love in the Name of the Lord Jesus

Lyuben



#14 Fortigurn

Fortigurn

    Omega

  • Christadelphian MD
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 34,244 posts

Posted 20 April 2004 - 12:35 PM

To the best of my judgment on your hot reactions on my study, most of you are young people.

Some of us are older. I don't think you'll find any 'hot reactions' in this thread, but you'll find many well considered responses. We've seen Bible codes come and go, and come and go...

I am a highly educated person and claim some scientific background.


I don't doubt that for a moment.

It was at that time when I realized what “created in the image of God” means. This means that the gracious God gifted us with a part of His own abilities to be creators. Not only this – He also made us able to evaluate creatures and creations.


I agree entirely.

But a basic characteristic of all us the humans, especially after the original sin, is the susceptibility to delusions. The latter could be avoided not by reason alone but only if the LORD gift us with His Spirit. The Spirit cannot be taken or bought with money but only received as a free gift.


I'm very concerned by this. The Bible is clear on the fact that delusions can be avoided by reading the Scriptures. The Holy Spirit is not necessary for this, and Christadelphians do not believe that the gift or gifts of the Holy Spirit are available today.

The computer era provided our generation with a powerful means of calculation. There appeared a new battlefield between the enemies of God and us. The battlefield in question is the Bible codes (mainly the Torah codes).


But the Bible says nothing of such codes. People have gone looking for them, assuming they are there. They have done so in order to seek out some kind of supernatural proof for the Bible's Divine origin. Your own post says this.

I will give you an example in a critical note: there a Brother or Sister requires a “standard doubleblind” (probably experiment).


Yes.

As far as I am aware, blinding is contra-indicative in Bible studies and has nothing to do with experiments of the kind discussed here.


What you are saying is that Bible codes will only be found by believers. This is a serious problem, don't you think?

However, as a fashion, the term may have been borrowed. In this case, my experiment is “fourteen-fold-blind” experiment. I have checked the intersections with ISRAEL against thirteen other words.


Your code here can be subjected to a doubleblind - you can either encrypt the data, or else simply give it to people to whom the word strings will mean nothing.

In this case, my experiment is “fourteen-fold-blind” experiment. I have checked the intersections with ISRAEL against thirteen other words.


That's not double blinding, that's just cross-corroboration.

I can also ask this Brother or Sister what does he/she mean by “disinterested party” – atheists, or mathematicians who do not know about the Holocaust?


Yes, preferably. If the data is Divinely encrypted in the Bible, anyone should be able to find it.

Another claim of this Brother or Sister is an “independent verification”. Just one more meaningless phrase of the atheists’ arsenal.


I'm not an atheist, and I don't think that's a meaningless phrase.

Let me consider the word “independent” first. This implies a third party, who must check two (or more) groups of results obtained by two (or more) teams or persons, who submit results of significant discrepancy. This should mean that someone else has discovered another method or code, so the independent jury must decide whose result is more plausible.


It means someone who is not a believer, repeating your experiment - both with the Bible and with other texts, using your method and code, nothing else.

That's fair enough, don't you think?

The word “verification” illustrates another missing of point. Results of this kind (not only my own work) can only be DISPROVED. They can never be PROVED. Even more, any CONFIRMATION in this particular case is meaningless.


This sounds to me like an argument from silence. Surely the onus is on you, as the one putting forward the case, to provide the evidence for it. If your case cannot be proved, then what good is it? If confirmation is 'meaningless', then what does your code actually mean?

How? Just by finding another word, which gives better results than the results submitted by me. It is another question whether this word must have something to do with the Holocaust or the establishment of the state of Israel. You may try with any of the 225 = 5,153,632 5-letter permutations in the Torah. (Israel is a 5-letter word in Hebrew.) I have tried with several of them. Or you may choose shorter words. The 4-letter permutations are only 234,256. Suppose you find a word that gives a better separation. What of that? Ah, wait. What about the year 693? Or the intersection that produces the lowest P? I haven’ included them in the calculation of the probability. If I have included them too, the overall probability would have been 10-10…

As you see, I can also boast with infinitesimally small probabilities. I did not include this figure not in order to humble myself deliberately but just because I am writing to believers. Could anybody of you say that he or she would believe if the probability is, say, 1/1,000,000, but wouldn’t believe in case it is “only”, say, 1/10,000? In my own opinion, statistics and probabilities are only to support the experimenter’s idea. Hunt for low probabilities is a vanity.


I direct you to the comments made by the brother who is a computer programmer and has a knowledge of statistics. He has demonstrated that your methodology is flawed, and subjective. In light of this, your comments about 'infinitesimally small probabilities' don't hold up.

Suppose these codes have been found not in the Bible but in another scripture or book(s) written by a modern author. I am absolutely certain that the resistance wouldn’t be so fierce.


They have been. That's why people laugh at 'Bible codes' these days, and why 'Bible codes' aren't taken seriously.

This fact also casts light on another pseudo-scientific claim: that of “a priori determination of the parameters of the experiment”. It is a good excuse for double standards. It is reasonable, of course, when you plan an experiment, which can yield several outcomes and you must outline the one you are interested in against any other result.


It's not a pseudo-scientific claim. It's just a matter of pointing out that when you create the parameters of your experiment in such a way as to secure the result which your hypothesis requires, then you haven't actually conducted an experiment - nothing has been tested. It's a setup. It's false methodology to reach a conclusion you wished to reach.

Thank you for your comments.
Miserere mei Deus,
Secundum magnam misericordiam tuam.
Et secundum multitudinem miserationum tuarum
dele iniquitatem meam.

______________________________________________________________________
target="_blank">I am a Christadelphian. Click here to see my confession of faith.
______________________________________________________________________
‘John Wesley once received a note which said, “The Lord has told me to tell you that He doesn’t need your book-learning, your Greek, and your Hebrew.”

Wesley answered “Thank you, sir. Your letter was superfluous, however, as I already knew the Lord has no need for my ‘book-learning,’ as you put it. However—although the Lord has not directed me to say so—on my own responsibility I would like to say to you that the Lord does not need your ignorance, either.”

Osborne & Woodward, ‘Handbook for Bible study’, pp. 13-14 (1979)

______________________________________________________________________
target="_blank">Apologetics

#15 Interpretum

Interpretum

    Omicron

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 450 posts

Posted 20 April 2004 - 03:04 PM

Hi Fortigurn et al

But the Bible says nothing of such codes. People have gone looking for them, assuming they are there. They have done so in order to seek out some kind of supernatural proof for the Bible's Divine origin. Your own post says this.


There IS evidence that there are hidden word plays in the Bible. For instance, one form of Bible code is an ACROSTIC.

In Esther, there are apparently 4 acrostics of the name YHWH used.

To quote from the footnote to Esther 1:20 in the NWT:

"It... and all the wives themselves will give." Hi' Wekhol-Hannashim' Yittenu' (Heb.) appears to be a reverse acrostic of the Tetragrammaton (YHWH). Three ancient Heb. mss are known that give the letters of the divine name here in acrostic in majuscule letters, as follows: [Hebrew omitted]. This is the first of four such acrostics of the name "Jehovah" [YHWH], and the Masorah in a rubric, or in red letters, calls attention to this."

(I have omitted the Hebrew simply because my keyboard doesn't support the Hebrew alphabet. However, the Masorites apparently distinguished the YHWH letters either in red letters, or by making the other letters much smaller.)

The other acrostics occur at Esther 5:4, Esther 5:13, and Esther 7:7.

So if the Hebrew authors can use very simple Bible codes such as acrostics, why is it not feasible that they could have been inspired to use more advanced codes such as Equidistant Letter Sequences?

Also, let me quote an article on the Internet (link below):

"Rabbi Michael Weissmandel [died 1957]... first had the idea to approach the Bible in an arithmetic way. He decided to look for the code-word TORAH (Tav, Vav, Resh, Heh) in the first book of the Bible, Genesis. Circling the first Tav that he found, he decided to skip 50 letters. (Why 50 ? Well, the Torah was given 50 days after the Jews left Egypt, so he thought this would be a good starting gap). The amazing thing is that he actually DID find TORAH spelt out at intervals of 50 letters, not only in Genesis but also in Exodus."
http://www.aj6.org/jpbo/311/page2.html

The next link shows the word TORAH in Genesis and Exodus... at a skip code of 50, starting with the very first letter of this word, that appears in the text:
http://www.aj6.org/jpbo/311/page4.html

The interesting thing was that, when he did the same thing with Leviticus, Numbers and Deuteronomy, he found the words again in Numbers and Deuteronomy, but this time backwards, with skip codes of 50 and 49 respectively. In Leviticus (the middle of the 5 books of the Torah), he found God's name YHWH, starting with the first "yud" and with a skip code of 7.
http://www.aj6.org/jpbo/311/page4.html

In other words, for some reason, Genesis and Exodus, starting with the very first letter of Torah ("Tav") in each text, actually spelled out Torah at a 50 letter skip... whilst Numbers and Deuteronomy do the same with the word Torah backwards (Heh, Resh, Vav, Tav) at skip codes of 50 and 49... whilst God's name (YHWH) can be found, starting with the first "yud" in the text... and skipping just 7 letters!

Coincidence? Well, I don't know what the probability is of this occuring by chance, but it just doesn't sound like chance to me. Not only is the word "Torah" significant (since it describes the first 5 books of the Bible) but so are the numbers 49 and 50.

"50 is an important number for the Torah. According
to the Bible, the Torah was given to the Jewish
people on Mount Sinai 50 days after they had left Egypt. The festival of Shavuot is still celebrated on this day. 7 is also an important Jewish number. According to Genesis, G-d rested on the 7th day after creation and this is still the holy Sabbath day. Can you think of any other Biblical sevens?"
http://www.aj6.org/jpbo/311/page5.html

I would slightly diverge from the explanation of 49 as given by the above site. To me, the numbers 7, 49 and 50 signify JUBILEES. The Jews were required to celebrate a sabbath every 7th year, and to count 7x7 years, or 49 years... after which the 50th year was to be an extra sabbath year, or a Jubilee year. So 7, 49 and 50 signify the cycle of Sabbath and Jubilees.

Anyway, it's up to each person to decide whether this discovery is down to pure chance, or deliberately encoded by the Author of the Torah (who, we know, was ultimately Almighty God himself.)

They have been. That's why people laugh at 'Bible codes' these days, and why 'Bible codes' aren't taken seriously.


The people who 'laugh' at Bible codes are usually people who 'laugh' at the Bible. On the other hands, many athiests have become believers because of the Bible code. Even Michael Drosnin, in his book, talks about the athiest scholar who, after researching the codes, became a believer.

Bible codes ARE taken seriously by some people... the problem is that there is a lot of misinformation about the codes out there. Michael Drosnin, the one who publicized the codes, is a double-edged sword. On the one hand, he brought lots of attention to the subject. On the other hand, lots of his codes are not particularly remarkable, statistically speaking - which is why the Moby Dick refutation seemed to be a refutation of Bible codes, whereas in reality it was merely a refutation of Drosnin's simplistic codes. I would refer you to http://www.biblecodedigest.com for much more convincing codes.

In the end, please bear in mind that the scientific community will ALWAYS be divided on this issue, since some scientists simply do NOT wish to acknowledge the existence of God, period. On the other hand, there ARE researchers who have become converts because of the codes. The webmaster of http://www.biblecodedigest.com is one example of such a person, who was a skeptic before embarking on his advanced research.

#16 Adanac

Adanac

    Omega

  • On Vacation
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,886 posts

Posted 20 April 2004 - 03:16 PM

That is all well and good Interpretum, if codes were unique to the Bible. But they aren't. As has been demonstrated codes appear in secular books, thus showing that it is not a miraculous phenomenon.

If someone became a believer because he looked into Bible codes then I am afraid he is not a believer in the God of the Bible. He may believe that codes exist in the Bible but that is as far as it'll take him.

I used to think Bible codes were amazing until looking into it. Now I realize that Bible codes are nothing more than pop religion - disgusting. Selling books based on Bible codes is immoral and misses what is unique to the Bible:
  • Saving truth

Housework has been a snap since I realized... "Hey! I'm a guy!".

#17 Interpretum

Interpretum

    Omicron

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 450 posts

Posted 20 April 2004 - 03:25 PM

Hi Adanac

I would agree with you if that were the end of the story, but it isn't.

Yes, codes can be found in any book, yet how significant are those codes... and were those codes deliberate, or down to chance?

You say you've "looked into it"... well, that's highly commendable. Now, please, continue to look into it by reading the following article, which shows how insignificant the codes in other books are by comparison to the codes being discovered today:

http://www.biblecode....com/page.php/9

I include a teaser of the article below. Please note my emphasis in capitals:

-----

Opponents of Bible codes say that you can find meaningful clusters in any book. To support their case, they presented an example of a code cluster about Hanukah they found in Tolstoy's War and Peace.

While this example was fairly comparable to clusters Bible code researchers had presented BACK THEN, our researchers have unearthed clusters that look like mountains compared to the molehill of the Hanukah example. In this report we present a detailed side-by-side comparison of the Hanukah example and the most extensive cluster researchers have located to date-- the explosive Isaiah 53 codes. In short, what skeptics told us three years ago is now COMPLETELY OUT OF DATE.

-----

In other words, Adanac, please do not base your conclusions on results that were found 3 YEARS AGO. There are much more remarkable codes that have been discovered since then, which makes the codes in books like War and Peace look like child's play.

Opponents like Brendan McKay have yet to find any such code cluster ANYWHERE ELSE as compared with the one that was discovered recently in Isaiah 53.

Edited by Interpretum, 20 April 2004 - 03:29 PM.


#18 Adanac

Adanac

    Omega

  • On Vacation
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,886 posts

Posted 20 April 2004 - 03:41 PM

Well I am not impressed, but I suppose if you want to believe there are codes there you will find them.

The Bible is a remarkable book without having to go to such things.
Housework has been a snap since I realized... "Hey! I'm a guy!".

#19 Guest_d&c_*

Guest_d&c_*
  • Guests

Posted 20 April 2004 - 04:03 PM

If Bible codes confirm someone's faith in the Bible, isn't that all well and good? Perfectly intelligent brethren, experts in statistics, scholars and intellectuals amongst them, have come to the conclusion that there IS something in Bible codes. Others, equally qualified, have come to the opposite conclusion. So, let each man be fully persuaded in his own mind. But in such a difference of opinion, the language used against those who see something in Bible codes appears rather unbrotherly. To describe the Bible codes researches of brethren as 'laughable' etc etc we find unnecessarily pejorative language. These researches were done in good faith and sincerity and integrity. Whether or not one agrees with them doesn't call for the language used. There are many on this forum who advocate their own views, e.g. that the Bible's prophecies have a continuous historical fulfilment, that Russia will invade Israel, that the Catholic church has some significant place in Bible prophecy, that Europe will unite, that the British and Americans will somehow support Christ at His return, that Antichrist will not appear in Jerusalem... who are totally convinced that the Bible teaches and supports their views. There are others who equally love God's word who truly can't see anything of the sort in the pages of Scripture. Yet in their discussions with those who hold these views, and for whom it is all so 'obvious', they ought never to ridicule the sincerely held persuasions of others. So those who don't think there's anything in Bible codes ought perhaps to treat the opposite view with respect and not derision, considering how you might feel if your cherished views were likewise ridiculed.

#20 Adanac

Adanac

    Omega

  • On Vacation
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,886 posts

Posted 20 April 2004 - 04:23 PM

I'm sorry if I came across like that d&c. But for me Bible codes just adds to the sensationalist religion that much of Christianity is turning into and the value and persuaviness of the truth is being more and more ignored.
Housework has been a snap since I realized... "Hey! I'm a guy!".

#21 Interpretum

Interpretum

    Omicron

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 450 posts

Posted 20 April 2004 - 04:27 PM

Hi Adanac

On the off-chance that someone doesn't read the article in it's entirety, let me summarize what it means - and put it into some perspective, in layman's terms.

Brendan McKay is one of the main opponents of the Bible, and he's the one who discovered the "Hanukah" code in War and Peace.

The "Hanukah" code consists of 7 skip codes within a 1,123 letter long section of text. The probability of a phrase occuring ranges from 1 in 17 (Menorah) to 1 in 453 (Lighting). The total odds of a similar cluster appearing by chance is 1 in 5. This is a MOLEHILL.

This is similar to some of the codes discovered by Michael Drosnin. McKay is refuting Drosnin's MOLEHILLS with his own MOLEHILL. Fair enough.

More recently, the people at BibleCodeDigest.com have worked on what they call the "Expanded Isaiah 53 Cluster", which was hinted at by earlier researchers.

The "Isaiah 53" cluster consists of 1,406 skip codes within a 1,584 letter long section of text. The probability of a phrase occuring ranges from 1 in 6 (Saviour) to "1 IN 12,000 TIMES 1 TRILLION TIMES 1 TRILLION TIMES 1 TRILLION", a 39 letter code which reads, "ascension, be a cause for my heart, and render my father transformed. I will be ashamed , and will divide the temple of the messenger". The total odds of a similar cluster appearing by chance is INFINITESSEMAL. (I can't copy and paste the odds figure, because it is in graphical format... but there are at least a few dozen noughts!)

So the "Isaiah 53" cluster has become a MOUNTAIN.

Thus, we are well past the simplistic Drosnin type MOLEHILLS and the researchers at biblecodedigest.com have produced a MOUNTAIN.

Brendan McKay has yet to produce a code MOUNTAIN in any other book, whether War and Peace, Moby Dick... or ANY other text in the world. So far all that has been produced is a MOLEHILL. That's why the chance of the "Hanukah" molehill occuring by chance is 1 in 5... whilst the chance of the "Isaiah 53" mountain occuring by chance is infinitessemal.

Well I am not impressed, but I suppose if you want to believe there are codes there you will find them.


See, it's not about WANTING to believer there are codes. It is about Brendan McKay's 3 year old research NOT refuting the current discoveries, which are MOUNTAINS towering over MOLEHILLS. Humans are very good at telling God how he SHOULD give us his message, or what we DO or DON'T need (as in those people who say, "We don't NEED these codes".) True, but I would not try to tell God what he should or shouldn't be doing. If there ARE indeed inspired codes in the Bible, that is His affair. We shouldn't be so quick to tell God what he should or shouldn't do with His Book.

If someone became a believer because he looked into Bible codes then I am afraid he is not a believer in the God of the Bible. He may believe that codes exist in the Bible but that is as far as it'll take him.


Different people are drawn to the light by different means. Some people in the past were lucky enough to witness great miracles. Some people merely heard God's wisdom through His word, and were drawn to Him. Saul had to have a divine revelation before he became a believer (Paul). So it is not beyond the Word of God to say that God would supply to unbelievers additional evidence that his Word is actually inspired, just as he opened Saul's eyes with the use of a MIRACLE.

Please try not to judge people's initial basis for become Christians. Bear in mind we live in a highly SKEPTICAL and SCIENTIFIC world. Is it really unreasonable to think that God is aware of this and hence preserved a code in His Word that could ONLY be discovered by such a generation?

I used to think Bible codes were amazing until looking into it. Now I realize that Bible codes are nothing more than pop religion - disgusting. Selling books based on Bible codes is immoral and misses what is unique to the Bible:


I agree that there has been a lot of "cashing in". Nevertheless, that is true of the Bible proper - lots of people cash in. The fact that people are cashing in on the Bible codes also, does not mean they don't exist, any more than people who are cashing in on the Bible proves that the Bible is false.

Please bear in mind that Bible codes may not be for you and me - but for the scientific unbelievers. Just as Jesus came to call not righteous people but sinners... and Paul talked about the Jews being "blinded" to the truth in order to bring glory to the Gentiles... so too, the Bible code may not be a message for Christians... because, as you said, we have all we need in the Bible proper. But scientists and skeptics require a higher level of proof... one which God could well be supplying them as we speak!

#22 Adanac

Adanac

    Omega

  • On Vacation
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,886 posts

Posted 20 April 2004 - 04:38 PM

Fair enough Interpretum. But I am wondering what this means:

ascension, be a cause for my heart, and render my father transformed. I will be ashamed , and will divide the temple of the messenger


Housework has been a snap since I realized... "Hey! I'm a guy!".

#23 Interpretum

Interpretum

    Omicron

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 450 posts

Posted 20 April 2004 - 05:27 PM

Hi Adanac

Fair enough Interpretum. But I am wondering what this means:
QUOTE 
ascension, be a cause for my heart, and render my father transformed. I will be ashamed , and will divide the temple of the messenger


Good question! I don't know exactly what that phrase means. Some of the sentence codes make more sense than others. For instance, a few other multiple word sentences read:

"And In His Name, As He Commanded, Jesus Is The Way"

"And Where Are They? The Sanhedrin Is Finished"

"And Command That We Skip Everything But The Gem Of Ascension"

Now, these make more sense to me than the original one I quoted. However, I think what the researches are pointing out is the remarkable fact that some of the codes form actual sentences... which is extremely improbable even by itself. The fact that these words, phrases and sentences are actually CLUSTERED around a small portion of plain text (Isaiah 53) makes it even more remarkable... something which Brendan McKay has yet to do with non-Biblical codes in, say, War and Peace.

As I pointed out, the biggest one he has found in the "Hanukah" code is the single word "Lighting", with a 1 in 453 chance. There are a few two-word codes, but none of them have a lower than 1 in 453 chance of occuring.

There ARE sentences in the "Isaiah 53" and other recent codes that, from the English point of view, don't make complete sense. Nevertheless, they DO seem to fit with the general theme of the specific topic being searched.

For instance, the longest code yet discovered is 73 LETTERS long - 26 English words long - and actually runs through the Isaiah 53 cluster:

"If The Friend Of Evil Will Thirst For The End Of My Innocence, His Home Is An Urn. Let Judas Have His Day. To Me, The Exalted One, They Fasted. Where Are You? Its Content Will Be Written From My Mouth. Father, Indeed You Will Raise The Dead Over There."
http://www.biblecode...com/page.php/41

Now, I agree it is not easy to interpret what this is saying. (For instance, how is "his home" an "urn"?) Nevertheless, please bear in mind this is a skip code - of 73 letters. It is something way beyond any simple 4 (or even 10) letter phrase that has previously been discovered.

Notice that the theme of this skip code is in harmony with Scripture (especially Isaiah 53, which it crosses.) If Jesus is the Word of God, then the code seems to fit quite well. It talks about a "friend of evil" thirsting for the end of Jesus' (?) innocence. It talks about Judas. It talks about them fasting over him... after, where is he? (After his death?) The contents of something (the Bible?) written at his (Jesus'?) mouth... and the dead being raised... all very Biblical themes.

I agree that it's not always easy to interpret some of the longer codes. But I think that, IF they exist as a supernatural phenomena (and not just random chance, as in the War and Peace codes), I think they will simply reinforce the message of the plain text. And indeed they do! Bear in mind, it is only Christians (not orthodox Jews) who believe that Isaiah 53 is referring to Jesus... but the Bible codes are strongly hinting that Christians are indeed correct in their interpretation.

Don't forget, some of you believe that God is doing miracles today... such as restoring the Jews to their homeland... and the possibility of a Third Temple. Is it is also possible that God has preserved miracles in His Word down through the centuries (remember how zealous the scribes were to preserve God's Word to the LETTER over the centuries?)... to produce something that would only be discovered in this age of computers? I believe it IS possible. Whether it IS true or not is still yet to be seen, but so far I have yet to see Brendan McKay and other opponents produce "Isaiah 53" type clusters in ANY OTHER TEXT.

#24 Adanac

Adanac

    Omega

  • On Vacation
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,886 posts

Posted 20 April 2004 - 05:38 PM

All this just goes to show that these codes are pretty useless. E.g.

And Command That We Skip Everything But The Gem Of Ascension

:P

The worry is that people will start to think these sentences have meaning and based their understanding on them instead of what the Bible actually says.
Housework has been a snap since I realized... "Hey! I'm a guy!".

#25 Guest_d&c_*

Guest_d&c_*
  • Guests

Posted 20 April 2004 - 05:50 PM

Adanac, your concerns are fair enough, wouldn't want you to think they're not recognized. Sensationalism is definitely not the grounds for faith.

#26 Dianne

Dianne

    Upsilon

  • On Vacation
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,082 posts

Posted 20 April 2004 - 05:54 PM

See, it's not about WANTING to believer there are codes. It is about Brendan McKay's 3 year old research NOT refuting the current discoveries, which are MOUNTAINS towering over MOLEHILLS. Humans are very good at telling God how he SHOULD give us his message, or what we DO or DON'T need (as in those people who say, "We don't NEED these codes".) True, but I would not try to tell God what he should or shouldn't be doing. If there ARE indeed inspired codes in the Bible, that is His affair. We shouldn't be so quick to tell God what he should or shouldn't do with His Book.

I know someone who does this all the time. :P

I don't think these so called 'codes' prove anything. They are NOT revealing anything new, from what I read of the sentences that's in this post, and so what if a few people were converted to Christianity based on Biblecodes? From what I read in scripture Christ emphasized that people were to hearken to God's WORD, not 'codes'.

I'd probably be more impressed if something was revealed that was not known before. It just seems like these words or phrases appear in 'hindsight'.

Edited by Dianne, 20 April 2004 - 05:59 PM.

"If it's not in the Bible, then why do you believe it?"
"I AM SPARTACUS!"
"It's the VIBE..."

#27 Interpretum

Interpretum

    Omicron

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 450 posts

Posted 20 April 2004 - 06:18 PM

Hi Adanac

All this just goes to show that these codes are pretty useless.


Useless to you as a Christian, perhaps... because you already believe that Jesus of Nazareth is the Messiah... and that the Bible is the inspired Word of God.

But to the Orthodox Jew, or to the secular scientist, they do not have that belief. So far, however, the codes I have seen seem to overwhelmingly support the Christian point of view. So they are not "pretty useless" to non-Christians. They are (possibly) yet another testimony to the inspiration of God's Word.

The worry is that people will start to think these sentences have meaning and based their understanding on them instead of what the Bible actually says.


Yes, this is a worry. But then, people have been interpreting (and misinterpreting) the PLAIN TEXT for 2,000+ years, so I wouldn't worry too much. If you don't believe in the Bible codes, that's fine. You don't HAVE to believe in the codes. Many scientists are coming to believe in them, however, regardless of how YOU or I view them.

I know someone who does this all the time.


Now, now, Dianne... I wouldn't say you do that ALL the time ;-)

I don't think these so called 'codes' prove anything. They are NOT revealing anything new and so what if a few people were converted to Christianity based on Biblecodes? From what I read in scripture Christ emphasized that people were to hearken to God's WORD, not 'codes'.


Yes, but before people hearken to God's WORD, they have to believe that it is, indeed, GOD'S Word... and not Man's. Many hundreds of millions of people on this planet believe that the Bible is merely a "good book", "Man's" word. Bible codes do not have to reveal ANYTHING new... but if they exist as non-random phenomena in the Bible, it proves that it is not MAN'S word.

I'd be more impressed if something was revealed that was not known before. It just seems like these words or phrases appear in 'hindsight'.


Would you really? Or would you just rubbish it... because you have already determined that the phenomena is not "from God", but mere random chance.

Actually, several codes DO appear to reveal things in advance. For instance, during Gulf War II, I was reading their article about the codes on Saddam Hussein and Iraq. I can confirm that they discovered the following code WELL BEFORE the official end of that war on May 1st, as I had read that code back in March. (They claim they first discovered this code on December, 2001.)

"You Will Crush the Guilty Saddam and the Month of Eyar Will be Restful"

The month of "Eyar" is May, in 2003. The article continues: "Another definition for the word "crush" in Hebrew is "shock," as in "Shock and Awe." Pentagon officials now say that the "Shock and Awe" attack never took place, and there are no plans to use it."

Please see the full article here, for more codes on Saddam Hussein:
http://www.biblecode...om/page.php/151

In the end, I'm not here to convince anyone. If a person chooses not to believe that Bible codes exist, that's their affair. I don't think salvation depends upon it :-) I'm just amazed that people (especially Christians who believe God is doing modern-day miracles) would eliminate any possibility of Bible codes, based on a 3 year old so-called "refutation" by Brendan McKay, because he found a 7 word code cluster in War and Peace... while codes research has advanced to the point that 1,000+ word and sentence clusters have been found in a very highly significant portion of scripture... Isaiah 53.

#28 Interpretum

Interpretum

    Omicron

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 450 posts

Posted 20 April 2004 - 06:43 PM

Hi d&c

I'm only just getting round to reading the article on the holocaust, but I wanted to say that I found the account of the salvation of the Jews in Nazi dominated Bulgaria by the people was very moving indeed.

#29 Guest_d&c_*

Guest_d&c_*
  • Guests

Posted 20 April 2004 - 06:49 PM

Glad someone found it helpful- maybe you could tell Brother Lyuben direct at piperov@sopharma.bg

#30 Dianne

Dianne

    Upsilon

  • On Vacation
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,082 posts

Posted 20 April 2004 - 07:12 PM

Now, now, Dianne... I wouldn't say you do that ALL the time ;-)

Wow, the guilty has spoken. I didn't even name names and you remarked on it. :P That was easier than I thought.


I don't think these so called 'codes' prove anything. They are NOT revealing anything new and so what if a few people were converted to Christianity based on Biblecodes? From what I read in scripture Christ emphasized that people were to hearken to God's WORD, not 'codes'.


Yes, but before people hearken to God's WORD, they have to believe that it is, indeed, GOD'S Word....


People who believed had no problems doing this before.

and not Man's. Many hundreds of millions of people on this planet believe that the Bible is merely a "good book", "Man's" word. Bible codes do not have to reveal ANYTHING new... but if they exist as non-random phenomena in the Bible, it proves that it is not MAN'S word


Any many hundreds of millions of people also believe that the Bible is more than a Good Book but the inspired Word of God.

It doesn't prove anything. All it is doing, as far as I can see is revealing things that are basically already known. So the word Torah is spelled out. What's the significance of that? most people already know what the Torah is?


I'd be more impressed if something was revealed that was not known before. It just seems like these words or phrases appear in 'hindsight'.


Would you really? Or would you just rubbish it... because you have already determined that the phenomena is not "from God", but mere random chance.


It's not from God. I'm sure of it. If someone has enough time on their hands, they could find this stuff almost in anything.

Actually, several codes DO appear to reveal things in advance. For instance, during Gulf War II, I was reading their article about the codes on Saddam Hussein and Iraq. I can confirm that they discovered the following code WELL BEFORE the official end of that war on May 1st, as I had read that code back in March. (They claim they first discovered this code on December, 2001.)

"You Will Crush the Guilty Saddam and the Month of Eyar Will be Restful"

The month of "Eyar" is May, in 2003. The article continues: "Another definition for the word "crush" in Hebrew is "shock," as in "Shock and Awe." Pentagon officials now say that the "Shock and Awe" attack never took place, and there are no plans to use it."


And this is a new Revelation? For all those who believed that Saddam would win please raise your hands??? Anyone? Anyone? :bow:

All I'm saying is that people do the same thing with the Trinity. Everytime there is an instance of 'three', they say that proves the Trinity. It's along the same lines.

Edited by Dianne, 20 April 2004 - 07:53 PM.

"If it's not in the Bible, then why do you believe it?"
"I AM SPARTACUS!"
"It's the VIBE..."




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users