THE MATHEMATICAL SIGNATURE OF GOD IN THE WORDS OF SCRIPTURE [INCREDIBLE PROOF]

BOOK THE SIGNATURE OF GOD: Documented Evidence That Proves Beyond Doubt the Bible Is the Inspired... ^ | 1998 | GRANT R JEFFERY

[Quix]

i THINK

Most of the so called Codes spread about are artifacts of man.

NOT ALL of them.

As I'd think you'd know.

[Starwind]

It seems that using non-biblical literature would provide a baseline against which one could compare biblical literature with this methodology of "signature search."

Results obtained from non-biblical literature would merely confirm it as non-biblical and sets an artifically low bar for a test of 'divinely inspired' (as opposed to a concordance or commentary for example) biblical literature to meet. The only divinely inspired biblical literature I know of, is the bible.

We already know the bible contains many instances of '7', '40', '1000' for example, whereas non-biblical literature does not have that same proportion. If something non-biblical were then used as part of a 'control' sample, it's lack of occurrances of instances of '7', '40', '1000' would by contrast make such instances in the bible stand out more, when we know they are normal and not hidden.

Those instances of '7', '40', '1000' in the bible are there in plain text by God's inspired writing, not secretly hidden in the text letter sequences and man's chapter/verse boundaries. But a flawed control having no instances of '7', '40', '1000' would leave the impression of the bible being encoded in ways God did not encode it.

Did that make sense?

The bible is unique and we must be careful how we compare it to other literature, especially if the purpse of our comparison is to form conclusions about how God wrote the bible.

[Quix]

I think there's a flaw in your reasoning etc. But I'm not about to ferret it out at this hour or soon.

But say you're right. Fine. Get a bunch of commentaries by people fascinated with counting things in the Bible and noting such surface stuff.

Analyze those texts. They ought to have enough surface such stuff to satisfy you as it being more reasonably equal.

I think the study presented contended that the differences were so many orders of magnitude that any fantasies of comparison--regardless--were laughable.

[Starwind]

I think the study presented contended that the differences were so many orders of magnitude that any fantasies of comparison--regardless--were laughable.

You've misunderstood my point to xzins, which was one cannot do such comparisons (of the type discused herein) between the bible and non-biblical literature because the bible is unique in regards to finding God's signature.

It's like comparing the only apple to a world of other fruit. Regardless of how much other fruit you test, those tests tell you nothing valid about the one and only apple, other than they're obviously not apples and the apple isn't like them - but we knew that already.

I was arguing against extra-biblical comparision and arguing in favor of exclusively intra-biblical comparisons, like my example with John 1:1-17, which you didn't like because you already knew it wouldn't turn out the same - which was my earlier point.

When man artifically cherry-picks the 'signature' and does not consistently look for the same signature in other portions of the bible, not surprisingly, the 'test for a signature' stands up only in the one place it has been applied. (duh)

[Baraonda]

"It's amazing that you seem remotely comfortable with that pattern."

Off the top of my head, here's a pattern for you:

16 2 3 13
5 11 10 8
9 7 6 12
4 14 15 1

It's a 4x4 matrix.

Note the following properties:

.Each row adds to 34
.each column adds to 34
.each diagonal adds to 34
.The four corner squares add to 34
.The top left 4 squares add to 34
.The top right 4 squares add to, you guessed it, 34
.The lower left 4 squares add to, again, to 34
.The lower right 4 squares add to, as by magic, to 34
.The middle 4 squares add to 34
.The middle 2 squares of the 1st col + the middle 2 squares of the last col =34
.The middle two squares of the top row + the middle 2 squares of the bottom row = 34
.The first two squares of the 1st col + the first two squares of the last col = 34 ETC

And, 3 + 4 = 7.

The 6X6 matrix has more properties. Multiples of 6 and 4 have even more properties.

[Alamo-Girl]

Thanks for the ping!

[Alamo-Girl]

Thank you for the ping!

I don't have much use for the commercialization of the original theory of equidistant letter sequencing, the article which was published in a peer reviewed math journal. The original article was quite engaging however.

[DAVEY CROCKETT]

Thanks Quix will have to get ith you tomorrow. I stll have family here. I had seen this before and found it very intersting. There is much more to it thm just what you have posted.

Thanks again for the ping.

[stands2reason]

I guess the control of other texts means nothing to you.

No.

Perhaps you could prove your perspective with Scripture matching the protocol in the doc?

I don't know what you're saying here. My perspective? My perspective is that this "proof" is lacking.

I suppose you are far sharper than the experts consulted and challenged?

Sharper? Not necessarily. More skeptical? Most definitely.

Again, don't expect people to take a proof on faith.

[Revelation 911]

Im not so sure why my 42 got zapped

Apologies to all if it offended anyone

[xzins]

Thank you, AG.

I was interested in your take on this.

I'm no mathematician, and I haven't kept up with this.

To what extent do you find it valuable, and where does it go astray?

[xzins]

Yes, it made sense.

We'd have to control for overt appearances of those numbers because they are regularly used.

A reference to "12" tribes or apostles; a reference to "7" churches or deacons....those we'd have to agree didn't count.

If we were to take a random passage from "Job" or from "Romans," I think we'd have a fair baseline....maybe.

Your thoughts?

[RnMomof7]

The Bible Codes are scoffed at by many ignorant folks who have not investigated the latest criteria etc. for valid codes nor even the whole principles behind them. I don't think God is ready to use them to show some astounding stuff but what has surfaced has been pretty incredible when all the facts are looked at closely enough

What version of the bible are they built on?

It just amazes me that people that do not read the bible now want to search for secret meanings and knowledge like Gnosticism

[bornacatholic]

The number "seven" permeates the totality of Scripture because the number speaks of God's divine perfection and perfect order.

*Six is also a number of perfection.

City of God St. Augustine. Book X1, Chap. 30

Chapter 30.

-Of the Perfection of the Number Six, Which is the First of the Numbers Which is Composed of Its Aliquot Parts.

These works are recorded to have been completed in six days (the same day being six times repeated), because six is a perfect number,-not because God required a protracted time, as if He could not at once create all things, which then should mark the course of time by the movements proper to them, but because the perfection of the works was signified by the number six. For the number six is the first which is made up of its own57 parts, i.e., of its sixth, third, and half, which are respectively one, two, and three, and which make a total of six. In this way of looking at a number, those are said to be its parts which exactly divide it, as a half, a third, a fourth, or a fraction with any denominator,e.g., four is a part of nine, but not therefore an aliquot part; but one is, for it is the ninth part; and three is, for it is the third. Yet these two parts, the ninth and the third, or one and three, are far from making its whole sum of nine. So again, in the number ten, four is a part, yet does not divide it; but one is an aliquot part, for it is a tenth; so it has a fifth, which is two; and a half, which is five. But these three parts, a tenth, a fifth, and a half, or one, two, and five, added together, do not make ten, but eight. Of the number twelve, again, the parts added together exceed the whole; for it has a twelfth, that is, one; a sixth, or two; a fourth, which is three; a third, which is four; and a half, which is six. But one, two, three, four, and six make up, not twelve, but more, viz., sixteen. So much I have thought fit to state for the sake of illustrating the perfection of the number six, which is, as I said, the first which is exactly made up of its own parts added together; and in this number of days God finished His work.58 And, therefore, we must not despise the science of numbers, which, in many passages of holy Scripture, is found to be of eminent service to the careful interpreter.59 Neither has it been without reason numbered among God's praises, "Thou hast ordered all things in number, and measure, and weight."60

[Starwind]

What I described with the 7, 40, 1000 (and now 12) etc was an example of why extra-biblical comparisons skew the results (tend to give a false-positive signature indication) - ie an example of what not to do.

IMO, what to do, is to decide (lol) where God's signature is to be found; in the words & letters, or in only the text attributed to God speaking, or in pronouns and verbs only, etc., and what that signature might look like.

Then apply that test of what it looks like in every place it ought to appear, and let the 'signature theory' live or die on those results. We don't tweak special-case signatures for different parts of the bible - unless we believe God tweaks His signature everywhere. So, the criteria for a 'signature of God' is defined and vetted, consistently, intra-biblically.

If the theory bears out, and a 'signature' seemingly is found consistently at least everywhere we expect it, then apply the same test extra-biblically to presumably show the test failing extra-biblically - because we assume God didn't 'sign' extra-biblical texts. If we find God's signature extra-biblically, then it probably wasn't God's signature in the first place, even in the bible, and we go back to the drawing board.

Note the distinction here is the criteria is first defined and vetted in the bible only. What may or may not exist elsewhere does not 'taint' the definition of the criteria as it is being developed. And then only successful signature theories are further tested for confirmation (anticipating true-negatives) against extra-biblical writings.

IMO, the real signature of God is actually found in His prophecies.

God's signature of authenticity is in His foreknowledge revealed in a prophetic passage. Only God has such foreknowledge and only God can ensure the revelations are given consistently to many people across centuries of time. Note how *none* of that could possibly be of man, even though the divine dictation was taken by man, ie man can't forge (or falsely detect) such a 'signature'.

We can test fulfilled prophecies to see if they come true (they do). We can test unfulfilled prophecies to see that they must yet be future (they are). We can apply these tests to every prophecy in the bible (consistently), and compare them against the historical record (we have).

We can then check extra-biblical writings to see if they likewise come true. Almost all extra-biblical writings lack prophetic passages, and those that have them generally fail to come true, or are so vague as to be untestable (no signature).

Ergo, God's bible is authentic. His signature being in His prophecies, and His signature (and prophecies) being found nowhere else.

[Alamo-Girl]

Thank you so much for your reply!

To what extent do you find it valuable, and where does it go astray?

I find the original study which was published in the peer-reviewed journal Statistical Science in 1994 to be very engaging. Here is the article as it was originally published: StatSci-Equidistant Letter Sequences in the Book of Genesis

And here is the home page to that website which explains the history of the research, the contention and the response.

IMHO, it has gone astray because of the commercialization. People are profoundly interested in being able to predict the future – crystal balls, Jane Dixon, horoscopes, etc. But the point of the ELS is not to predict the future but to reveal the authenticity of the Torah by looking at the past. For instance, ELS queries of specific rabbis leads to their birth date and date of death. ELS queries of important historical events reveal the players, etc.

I read somewhere that the mathematicians were outraged at the commercialization because the Torah expressly speaks against such sooth-saying – that it is against God’s will and thus will not lead to fruition anyway. Nevertheless, the book The Bible Code became a top-seller as did the various related books and software by other authors.

Isaac Newton evidently believed the Scriptures contained a code which unlocks the secrets of the universe. Certainly, the Jewish tradition believed the same. And thanks to modern computer technology they have revealed as much in the ELS of the book of Genesis in 2 dimensions. The researchers (I understand) wish to expand this to the whole Pentateuch and higher dimensions.

And speaking of the Pentateuch and Scriptures – there is another mathematical structure within the Scriptures – including the New Testament – which also speaks to divine authorship. Freeper Seven_0 brought the information to the Standing in Awe thread. Here is an excerpt:

The scripture divides into five pentateuchs, Five in scripture divides into 4+1, so there are four in the old testament and one in the new testament. Each of the pentateuchs further divides into 4+1 as do Paul's two pentateuchs.

Each pentateuch has the same basic structure. I will make a few comparisons for you since time is short. Once you see a few you will find they are endless, you can always find more. In fact it has turned out to be a wonderful mnemonic, as I have organized the scripture in my mind.

Compare Exodus with Acts, each is a number two. in the first you see the natural man leaving Egypt. in the second you see the spiritual man leaving the city, which is spiritually called Sodom and Egypt.

Look at Deuteronomy and Revelation, each a number five. In the first you see the natural man about to recieve the Earthly inheritance, in the second, you see the spiritual man about to recieve the spiritual inheritance.

There is a parallel between "Ezra, Nehemiah, and Ester" and "Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi," all books of the captivity.

[xzins]

Thank you for your time and insights, AG. You have again been helpful.

You are saying that as a separate study (within the parameters of valid statistical research) that ELS can be engaging and should be pursued.

You appear to be suggesting with the commercialization that ELS has gone after the sensational and left any rigid standards to which statistical research might have subjected it.

Do I have that correct?

Also, I saw the 5's discussion on the "standing in awe" thread and appreciated it at that time. I wonder if Seven_0 has any comments on this subject?

[Quix]

imho,

the scholars at BIBLECODESDIGEST.COM

have overcome that problem. They are a nonprofit group working on it as a personal interest, passion and ministry.

The standards that they are evolving took a big jump with the last parallel comparison between WAR AND PEACE in HEBREW and the Scriptures.

They are in working dialogue with the best Israeli researchers as well as those in this country.

Most of the naysaying I've seen is very behind the times and usually more blind and biased than informed.

[xzins]

My concern is integritous research and a regard for truth no matter where or how it might be revealed.

I have no bias toward, nor prejudice against this subject. (I also have very little information on it.)

I repeat that this is a matter in which some might become interested, but that it is not a central issue to our Christian faith. Therefore, some will be more interested in it (as an avocation?) than others.

Everyone on all sides should be patient.

[FourtySeven]

The incredible mind reader doesn't work for the number 66.

I picked 66, which meant the number I had to "look at and concentrate on" was 54 right? The crystal ball didn't return 54's symbol for 3 times I tried it.

It seems to work for other numbers though.