Posted on 11/28/2004 4:42:56 PM PST by Quix
:>)
THERE WAS A QUALITY comparison done between the Bible Codes protocals with Scripture and with War and Peace in Hebrew. You have been misinformed.
THE SCRIPTURES WERE MARKEDLY DIFFERENT IN THE QUALITY AND QUANTITY OF THE CODES. The Codes were markedly longer and qualitatively differen in Scripture.
Perhaps you didn't notice in the doc beginning this thread. A COMPARISON WAS DONE WITH OTHER TEXTS. AND THERE WAS NOTHING ANYWHERE REMOTELY LIKE WHAT APPEARED WITH SCRIPTURE FOUND IN *ANY* OTHER TEXT.
I guess facts are easy to overlook in a long doc like that.
I can understand your quite reasonable perspective.
To me, the protocals were very straightforward as were the findings. Easily verifiable.
Easy also to attempt the same in other texts as the challenge encouraged.
I don't have any trouble at all trusting Panin's findings.
And, Jeffery's s not anywhere near as questionable as some would have you believe.
the mathematical proofs are all irrelevant (it's like "proving" that I exist based on an examination of the remaining universe: it proves I erxisted but doesn't tell who I am). Same with God: the language suggests it. this is no proof. belief preceeds faith but, belief according to principal is not belief in =subject=)!!!
etc. (ask!)
If the doc is not of any value to you, fine. Enjoy whatever is.
No offence meant.
doc very good.
Without having done a very detailed analysis and critque, at first glance it would seem this is merely an artifact of looking for anything divisble by seven, and then cherry-picking the boundaries and criteria of what is examined and ruling out anything *not* divisible by seven, or adjusting the boundaries to include enough criteria so it becomes divisible by seven:
A Listing of the Phenomenal Features of Sevens Found in Matthew 1:1-17 Herein the criteria was;And note the criteria applied in 1-11 was not consistently applied in 12-17; ie, it was cherry-picked.
'numeric value of vocabulary words',
'Greek nouns' and
'Greek article for "the"'In the first eleven verses of Matthew 1:1-11 we find these additional features: Herein the criteria became;
'number of vocabulary words',
'words begin with a vowel',
'words begin with a consonant',
'number of letters in [only those 49] words',
'words [of only those 49] occur more than one time',
'words [of only those 49] occur only one time',
'proper nouns',
'number of male names',
'letters in [women's] names'
Why not the number of verbs or participles? Why not the number of vowels total? Why not number of letters in male names?
Because they weren't divisible by seven and hence of no interest to be included in the result, which makes the result a self-fulfilling 'signature'. If you only include things divisible by seven, all you'll conclude is the "incredible phenomena" of things divisible by seven. (duh)
The artifact answer is my first inclination, as it was yours.
There remains, however, the statistical question regarding any random assemblage of letters or any other random selection of writing. One should be able to subject those to such numerical "cherry picking" in the same manner as one "cherry picks" scripture.
A normal range of "cherry picks" should eventually come about. The bible will either fall within that range, or it will fall outside that range at a statistically significant level.
Perhaps it might be easier to study if one put a time limit on the "cherry picking" search. How many can be found in 1 hour on randomly selected pages of literature, correspondence, bible, etc.
What do you think?
Didn't read it that way at all.
Odd that you did.
I read it that he tried about every way imaginable over 40 years or more and noted all the ways that worked.
Tried similar things with other texts and noticed that there was absolutely NO COMPARISON between other texts and Scriptures on the number of such 'coincidences.'
But I can understand that some people have a need to see it otherwise.
Thanks.
Tons.
Much appreciate your tone.
Assuming one were seraching for the 'signature' of God, one would expect to find it in bible text, and not the TV Guide, as an example.
Within the bible text then, try the same criteria on John 1:1-17 and see if you find the 'signature of God' there. No? Guess God didn't sign "John" then, so remove John from the Canon and next check Romans...
When one spends 40-60 years sifting for every possible speck of gold or nugget one can find, I don't think one determines the criteria--one instead looks for what's there as many ways as possible and as many forms and shapes of gold as possible.
He seemed to do a magnificent job of letting the phenomena speak to him.
God seems to have chosen the different types of words etc. with which to grace with 7's so to speak. I suppose one could complain that God wasn't consistent from one sample to the next but I don't think God would be very impressed or bothered by the complaint.
The main point as I see it is--the same sort of attempts were made with a variety of other similar texts--to absolutely no avail--and even so in English where the vocabulary breadth would make it easier. Even with computers. Hasn't been duplicated--AT ALL.
Sounds like a lot more than an artifact, to me.
Probably a more reasonal proposition than many would noise about on this thread.
However, the contention is that nothing has been done in the decades since. Further that nothing could be surfaced in a person's entire lifetime to compare with the Scriptural examples.
I don't know if that's a faith assertion or a reasoned one based on some computer runs that have been done similar to the original researcher's studies, efforts, protocals.
In any case, I'd suggest instead of an hour--20-50 hours.
But I can understand that some people have a need to see it otherwise.
You can find the same 'signature of God' expressed numerically in this incredible mind reader (you'll need macromedia 'flash' plug-in in your browser).
When your ready, I'll explain how it reads your mind - it really does. Try it, you'll be impressed.
Nonsense.
No one is presuming to construe it that God signed every several verses of Scripture in a particular way.
God did however much of it that He did. He didn't have to meet our silly notions on how He OUGHT to have done it!
If one used only biblical writings, then one could simply set a low standard as evidence of the signature.
If one uses writing that it is absolutely agreed is not of divine origin (anything by Gore Vidal, for example :>), then one would have a baseline for comparing with recognized divine writings.
Maybe tuesday. Not tonight.
But I've seen a number such things and they don't impress me.
ABsolutely.
And, supposedly such challenges have not been met for decades.
Would be great to have some of the naysayers try.
Agreed. I've seen number of 'bible codes' and they don't impress me either, for the same reason. Neither are of God, both are contrivances of man.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.