Posted on 08/17/2006 6:56:14 PM PDT by Quix
[Quix note: The green bold emphases are in the original. But I'm too tired to code them here or even to pour it through Word to do it. Sorry. I did use some spacing, paragraphing for emphasis on the fly]
= = = = = =
Lengthy Mel Gibson Codes Presage DUI Incident
The May 2004 issue of Bible Code Digest (BCD) featured an article
http://www.biblecodedigest.com/page.php/232
[May 2004 original article]
describing a 146-letter-long code about Mel Gibson. This astonishing code portrayed him as being guilty of something and of being "rotten." Interwoven codes further described him as hurrying and insulting from a "record" (a DUI charge?). They also alluded to someone fixing the story, or not telling it right.
Two years ago, the orthodox Jewish translator of this code, Moshe Aharon Shak, interpreted some elements of the code as references to the making of the film The Passion of the Christ. We published his account,
even though we begged to differ with his interpretations, because the code was the longest one discovered to date at that time.
Furthermore, the code was interlaced with a 109-letter-long code, running the opposite direction. And Shak found two 44-letter-long codes and a 27-letter-long code, at multiples of the skip of the original code.
This collection of five codes was so long and so tightly interlaced that it had to be intentionally encoded. It deserved full disclosure in spite of its troublesome content.
In the May 2004 BCD issue, Shak's article was prefaced by BCD editors with suggestions that the codes could have referred to events earlier in Gibson's life, when he was, by his own admission, a "rotten" person. After Gibson's DUI incident hit the news, however, the content of this code seems predictive of that event, over two years prior to its occurrence. While the references in the code are certainly open to a wide variety of interpretations, many elements of it seem eerily prophetic of Gibson's debacle.
Key Excerpts
Here are some key excerpts from the code discoveries, with possible interpretations in brackets:
Comes an honest, wholehearted person to Gibson: "Guilty one!" [Police charge him.]
Hashem: "Mel is rotten." [Hashem is a Hebrew name for God, which means The Name.]
He insulted from a record. Ah, you are in a heap of ruins. [Gibson allegedly uttered anti-Semitic and sexist insults to the arresting officer after being apprehended for speeding and DUI. News of this has brought Gibson's reputation and future into jeopardy. The code implies that Gibson's ruin will be the direct result of the insults he made.]
The one who fixed outside, tell it right! [The initial police report did not disclose the nature of Gibson's behavior nor his comments.]
Mel hurried a thorn that lived and therefore a thick forest died. [Speeding? Gibson was doing 87 in a 45 zone. His remarks, a thorn, received widespread press, causing a forest to die to supply the newsprint.]
And the wicked person: "Let us cut out the 60 (true parts – leave in the wrong part); let us become (pretend that we are) naïve." [Could this refer to the policeman who tried to cover up what happened when Gibson was apprehended?]
I was a suckling to the version. Here I will stir to loathe. [The version could be the anti-Semitic point of view. Mel Gibson learned this point of view from his father. It is unclear whether loathe refers to the way that anti-Semitic people loathe Jews or to whether Mel Gibson is loathing the views of his father.] Deceive! Can you understand that God the supreme will hit? This is from the One God, to them. [Here the one speaking appears to shift from a person to God Himself.]
Further interpretations are certainly possible for the above, as well as the remaining parts of the five codes. For example, the Hebrew word for "drink" appears within the longest code, if one of the spaces between letters is shifted. Shak's translation of the five interlaced codes appears in the May 2004 article, and the codes are recapped below.
Most Bible codes are prophetic fragments. Their general language and uncertainty as to context (e.g., who is speaking and which nearby codes are related) render such codes unreliable as the basis for making predictions. Typically, after an event has occurred, however, it is easy to observe numerous possible references to that event within a group of codes.
Recap of Shak's Translation of the Five Lengthy Mel Gibson Codes
146-Letter-Long Code (Skip = 3,806)
The ones that made me, the mob, was blackened by me (one hundred are his Gods). The one who fixed outside, tell it right! Please cut off 60! Comes an honest, a wholehearted person to Gibson: "Guilty one! Are the nation and God a joke? Does a heap of ruins a place to permanently place water? No!" (That is) His line! It is their anger! The story of creation the guilty one will negate! He placed permanently, and he insulted from a record. Ah, you are in a heap of ruins. It is a beautiful hotel that is a heap of ruins (that is Kosher). Hashem: "Mel is rotten." It has to be said, "God is one." My God! Hashem is the one that kills. He killed; or, another interpretation: "because Hashem is God."
109-Letter-Long Code (Skip = -3,806, the opposite direction of 146-letter-long code)
"Hashem! But the ruins of His anger you are." A plain person: "What? Hey, there is not one God. I have 100." Mel hurried a thorn that lived and therefore a thick forest died. Aha, a man of cheatings! Established a negative thing. Booty, present, he loved. Where from? From a different interpretation! Was it a nail? A hundred? God – who died? It is a cement as a savior to the United Nations. Seventy owe. Well, will an old wise man wrap up the Bible? Come . . .
Note: Seventy is a Biblical reference to the number of non-Jewish nations.
44-Letter-Long Code (Skip = 7,612, double that of the longest code)
For me the 60 is convenient. I was a suckling to the version. Here I will stir to loathe. Deceive! Can you understand that God the supreme will hit? This is from the One God, to them.
Note: According to Jewish law, one part of 60 does not contaminate the bulk. The implication here is that the whole is contaminated (all 60 parts).
44-Letter-Long Code (Skip = 11,418, triple that of the longest code)
"To riches he comes as very excited. He has cynics." (It is) my mouth. "(Mel's cynics) entertained at God's (expense)." Who? The seventy (non-Jewish Biblical nations of the world) in that way. Mel is fear. "I am first!"
27-Letter-Long Code (Skip = -11,418, triple that of the longest code, and in the opposite direction)
A story that in his mother, the man of God. And the wicked person: "Let us cut out the 60 (true parts – leave in the wrong part); let us pretend that we are naïve."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subscribe Free! Sign Up Today! Become a member of the non-profit Isaac Newton Bible Code Research Society.
Not only will you be part of the world's leading organization researching and publicizing Bible and Torah codes, but you will receive Bible Code Digest absolutely free, including . . .
Latest Bible Code News
Easy-to-Understand Bible Code Feature Articles
Exciting Inside Information from Leading Code Researchers
Details of Great New Discoveries
Summaries of the Latest Battles Between Code Proponents and Skeptics
Stay current on Bible code news. Be first to hear about all of the latest Bible code discoveries.
Sign up to receive Bible Code Digest today.
Hah! Your confidence is truly endearing. All the best, is coming your way...
But, what about Super Bowl winners. Surely Divine Revelation must be as equally concerned with football as it is with drunk-driving actors.
Given the statement "The love of money is the root of all evil," I fail to see any validity in such a probability.
Certainly God is concerened with Mel as an individual.
But I think the illustration is more along other lines.
Perhaps that
--Wonderful works such as THE PASSION OF THE CHRIST do not earn Heaven. Salvation is by faith in Christ and His Blood, alone.
= = = = = =
It's interesting that no one seems willing to deal with this fact:
"This collection of five codes was so long and so tightly interlaced that it had to be intentionally encoded. It deserved full disclosure in spite of its troublesome content." How courageous.
Most Bible codes are prophetic fragments. Their general language and uncertainty as to context (e.g., who is speaking and which nearby codes are related) render such codes unreliable as the basis for making predictions. Typically, after an event has occurred, however, it is easy to observe numerous possible references to that event within a group of codes.
= = = =
This is also a very important fact, principle in such analyses.
I sometimes think that even when there's a long, very statistically valid code, that too much can be made of possible interpretations. That is, that given the various possible plausible wordings per the Hebrew scholars, this or that option may be made a lot of plausibly but still miss what God may be trying to say. We ALL STILL look through the glass darkly even and maybe especially with the codes.
To me, it's interesting that the 2004 code may have presaged Mel's DUI. And, that it may have at least hinted at the tortured personal and spiritual issues involved.
It's quite plausible to me that given THE PASSION OF THE CHRIST--which I believe God greatly used Mel to bring forward--that God could further use MEL TO HIGHLIGT VARIOUS SPIRITUAL ISSUES.
1. That pride and money don't cut it.
2. That anti-Jewish stuff is deplored by God.
3. That works don't earn Salvation.
4. That God will expose sin's pollutions regardless of world stature and degree of fame.
5. That humility before God always is preferred to fame, money, achievement etc.
Such messages seem clearer to me in this Mel bunch of codes than a lot of the tedious spelling out of various interpretive cryptic options.
I think the cryptic element is part of what Christ referred to when He mentioned to His disciples why He spoke in parables--hiding truth from the skeptics while revealing it--at least providing evidence for faith--to those of authentic heart belief.
16 And one of you say to them: Go in peace, be ye warmed and filled; yet give them not those things that are necessary for the body, what shall it profit? 17 So faith also, if it have not works, is dead in itself.
Then Jesus said to them: Amen, amen I say unto you: Except you eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, you shall not have life in you.
*Jesus said nothing about cryptic messages embedded in Scripture. He EXPLAINED difficult parables to those He chose, i.e., the Apostles, the Bishops
Of course you are at liberty to believe whatever you want. It is just th esiomple fact these "messaages" in the Code are only rectroactively applied.
Ping me when you figure out what the bible code tells you about the date of Pope Benedict's death BEFORE it occurs.
I think I understand your perspective.
Some of the interpretations of the Mel codes occurred in 2004.
Now they want to use this mystical malarkey to further malign Mel Gibson?
Belief in Bible codes is nothing more than a modern day heresy!
= = = =
The BIBLECODEDIGEST.COM SITE as well as several other quality sites by Israeli scholars host a number of high quality scientific research articles which indicate the above statement is quite false.
And, Jesus' own statement can be applied--the Codes affirm that Jesus came in the flesh as well as all the foundational doctrines of the faith. Therefore, they do not originate from Satan.
But then, that should be self-evident as it would be extremely highly unlikely to the max that God would allow satan that kind of capacity to monkey around with the literal text of His Holy Word.
I do realize that cognative dissonance seems to trouble naysayers about 0.00000000000000000000%
Thanks. "Iron sharpens iron."
The following good points are available in more than abstract form at the link following:
= = = = =
A Review of the Attempts to Invalidate the Torah Codes
English Version
Hebrew Version
MBBK's Study of Variations
Abstract:
A paper of McKay, Bar-Natan, Bar-Hillel and Kalai (MBBK) in the Statistical Science (1999) made the extraordinary claim that the result of Witztum, Rips and Rosenberg (WRR), which was published in the same journal in 1994, was obtained by deceit. The main statistical work presented in MBBK's paper is the "study of variations", aimed at proving that WRR's result was obtained through "tuning" of their data.
In reply, we argue that MBBK's case is fatally defective, indeed that their results merely reflect on the choices made in designing their "study of variations", collecting the data and presenting the results. We present extensive evidence in support of that conclusion. In particular, we report on many experiments of our own, in which we applied their "study of variations" to several lists of data, some of them "tuned" and some of them not "tuned" – and the results are the exact opposite of the expectation of MBBK's thesis.
= = = ==
http://www.torahcodes.co.il/debate1.htm
= = = =
and:
Concerning the Choices of Dates for WRR's Rabbis Samples
This article scrutinizes MBBK's claim that WRR directly optimized the results by exploiting "beneficial" choices pertaining to the dates. Careful examination of all the choices indicates WRR's perfect integrity. Alternative choices, based on MBBK's suggestions, would have yielded better results –– sometimes by a factor of 2 or 3, sometimes by a factor of 10 or 100, and sometimes by a factor of tens of thousands.
All this starkly contradicts MBBK's report and the impression created by their article.
via:
http://www.torahcodes.co.il/date_hb.htm
The first parts of which are here:
Bs"d Draft. Adar 7, 5761 (3 March 01)
Concerning the Choices of Dates
for WRR's Rabbis Samples
By Doron Witzum
Index:
Introduction
Part A: Direct Optimization
Chapter I. The First Sample: Was There Any Optimization Through Dates?
Chapter II. The Second Sample: Was There Any Optimization Through Dates?
Chapter III. An Instructive "Replication" of MBBK
Appendix
The choice to add/remove/correct dates
The choice to write the day and the month, but not the year
Choices concerning month names and their spelling
The choice to not specify dates by "special days"
The choice to write 15th or 16th in two ways and not only one.
The choice of date formations.
An instructive "replication" produced by MBBK.
Acknowledgements
Bibliography
Introduction:
WRR's experiment concerning the hidden Genesis code, (publicized in Statistical Science [1]), is the subject of the critical paper of MBBK (McKay, Bar-Natan, Bar-Hillel & Kalai): "Solving the Bible Code Puzzle," in that same journal [2]. They discuss (Section 5 and Appendix B) the dates used in WRR's samples, claiming that WRR had many choices pertaining to these dates. Their argument is twofold:
1. They claim that WRR exploited "freedom" in choosing dates to directly optimize their results.
In this respect, they claim that WRR always (or almost always) made choices that improve their results.
2. MBBK used these alternative choices as "variations" in their own "study of variations".
In this context they claim that apparent deliberate optimization of dates to improve results, is not necessarily from deliberate optimization of dates, but rather indirect evidence that WRR directly optimized the appellations.
In their discussion MBBK mixed up the two perspectives, but we will deal with them separately, and thus clarify this issue.
In part A we will discuss perspective 1: Did WRR actually exploit "beneficial" choices to directly optimize their results or not.
In part B we will discuss perspective 2: Does the analysis of the variations pertaining to dates indicate optimization through the appellations?
Part A: Direct Optimization
Introduction
In this section we will scrutinize MBBK's claim that WRR directly optimized the results by exploiting "beneficial" choices pertaining to the dates.
Concerning direct optimization, remember that originally P1 and P2 were the sole statistics used to measure the success of L1 and L2. Therefore, any optimization of dates must have been in relation to P1 or P2, or, more probably, in relation to Min(P1-P2). Therefore, it is most sensible to examine the situation with these statistics. Instead, MBBK present their results in relation to other statistics. Our article [3] (Chap. 3) already points out that this grossly distorts the real results. This article will also give some clear examples of this.
The choices presented by MBBK are far less relevant to the second rabbis sample, L2, than to the first sample, L1. This is because the conditions of the second experiment were already defined by the first experiment, leaving little room for choice in the second experiment. Therefore we will discuss the two samples separately.
Chapter one will discuss "optimization" through date choices in L1.
Chapter two will discuss the same concerning L2. This discussion will be brief and simple because only one kind of choice is relevant in L2.
Chapter three will evaluate MBBK's "replication" which used alternative dates.
Chapter I
The First Sample: Was There Any Optimization Through Dates?
In Section 5 of their article (pgs. 155-156), MBBK list the following possible date choices:
The choice to correct/add/remove dates.
The choice to write the day and month without the year.
The choice to use specific names of months (and not others) and specific spellings (and not others).
The choice of not "specifying dates by special days such as religious holidays".
The choice to write days falling on the 15th or 16th in two different forms and not only in one.
The choice of certain forms of dates.
We will explain the background of each choice, and investigate whether it would have improved or worsened WRR's original results. To keep things brief, most details are in the appendix and only conclusions are discussed here.
Careful examination of all the choices indicates WRR's perfect integrity. Alternative choices, based on MBBK's suggestions, would have yielded better results –– sometimes by a factor of 2 or 3, sometimes by a factor of 10 or 100, and sometimes by a factor of tens of thousands.
All this starkly contradicts MBBK's report and the impression created by their article.
An example:
Regarding choice 6 mentioned above, "the choice of certain forms of dates", we write in the appendix (Section 6):
Most of the dates pertaining to L1 are given in Encyclopedia Margaliot in standard forms and not specified by "special days". Of the 37 dates in L1, 30 are given in standard forms. The Encyclopedia uses the following four standard forms:
"éøùú 'à" .
"éøùú 'àá" .
"éøùúá 'à" .
"éøùúá 'àá" .
The linguist Ya'akov Orbach o.b.m., WRR's linguistic advisor, suggested using the three standard forms a-c. We do not know his reasons, and we specifically do not know whether he examined or considered the forms used by Encyclopedia Margaliot. (Perhaps it is just a coincidence, but the date forms used by Encyclopedia Hebraica for the rabbis of L1 are precisely forms a-c.).
MBBK wrote concerning this:
"To write the day and the month, WRR used three forms, approximately corresponding to the English forms "May 1st," "1st of May" and "on May 1st". They did not use the obvious "on 1st of May," which is frequently used by Margaliot…" (Pg. 155)
They also wrote:
"The most obvious variation would have been to add the form akin to "on 1st of May". It gives the score [1.2, 2.2; 0.6, 16.4]." (Pgs. 168-169)
We examined MBBK's "most obvious" choice of including the fourth form, d, as well. Let us check the following choices:
Forms a-c (used by WRR).
Forms a-d.
continued at the link with this conclusion just before Chapt II:
Conclusion:
The main conclusion is that L1 was made with integrity.
Note that MBBK investigated L1 solely to see whether it was compiled honestly or not. As they write in Section 3 of their article:
"WRR's first list of rabbis and their appellations and dates appeared in WRR94 too, but no results are given except some histograms of c(w, w') values. Since WRR have consistently maintained that their experiment with the first list was performed just as properly as their experiment with the second list, we will investigate both." (Pg. 154)
Therefore they must accept our conclusions and all that they imply. Now that WRR's integrity is proven, the L1 results must also be evaluated with the evidence for a hidden Genesis code.
with these paragraphs further on at that link and doc:
Conclusion:
The above is unequivocal evidence that WRR acted honestly and exploited no "freedom in date choices" to improve their result. There was no direct optimization through date choices for L2.
This contradicts MBBK's implications, and eliminates their rationale to exploit date choices in "imitation" of WRR.
Chapter III
An Instructive "Replication" of MBBK
We saw that MBBK's report of WRR's date choices is distorted and misleading. They claim that WRR dishonestly improved their results– –but the opposite is true. This is not surprising because distortions and deceptions cloud all the issues of their entire article, as we already proved [3]-[8]. Now we will give another example: It concerns the manner in which MBBK conducted their "replication" concerning dates.
They write:
"As an aside, a universal truth in our investigation is that whenever we use data completely disjoint from WRR's data the phenomenon disappears completely. For example, we ran the experiment using only month names (including the Biblical ones) that were not used by WRR, and found that none of the permutation ranks were less than 0.11 for any of P1_4, for either list." (Pg. 168)
MBBK report a replication utilizing only month names not used by WRR, claim that it failed, and claim that the same happened to all their replications.
But close scrutiny of MBBK's list of "new" month names (details in the Appendix, Sec. 7) reveals many flaws:
The list is not closed.
Four of its 12 names are incorrectly spelled.
Four additional names are "Biblical" and the way they are used by MBBK is most dubious.
In addition, the design of MBBK's experiment's is flawed:
For L1: Dates based MBBK's month names apply to only 10 personalities out of 34.
For L2: They apply to only 15 personas out of 32.
These flaws are fatal: For example, eliminating the cases disqualified by flaws b-c leaves only three month names suitable for MBBK's experiment.
Conclusions:
The results of MBBK's "replication" are worthless.
Even if the flawed data is corrected, no replication can be prepared based on MBBK's dates, because:
Only three suitable names will remain.
The set from which the names were extracted is not closed.
Yes, we indeed subscribe to MBBK's assertion that:
"As an aside, a universal truth in our investigation is that whenever we use [wrong] data completely disjoint from WRR's data the phenomenon disappears completely."
Note that we have added the word "wrong" which MBBK has "erroneously" omitted.
(Similar criticism pertaining to their other "replications" is given in [9]).
= = = = = = = = = = = = =
More items from this link:
http://www.torahcodes.co.il/emanuel/eman_hb.htm
New Statistical Evidence for A Genuine Code in Genesis
This article reveals that:
The main "replication" presented in MBBK's Stat. Sc. paper, was actually deceptively fabricated as an "independent experiment" to present it's complete failure.
An experiment based on data given by MBBK's own expert shows that WRR's original result was not achieved through "tuning" of names and appellations.
. . . .
We describe all this not to criticize Dr Emanuel, who was most polite and candid, but to show the difficulty in getting uncensored information.
We thoroughly examined the material which included the lists publicized by MBBK, the information received from Dr Emanuel during our conversations with him [3] [5]-[8], and various excerpts where MBBK quoted their expert. All this made clear that their experiment was indeed important and instructive. We drew the following significant conclusions:
There is statistical evidence of (to quote MBBK), a "genuine ELS phenomenon in Genesis".
What MBBK did concerning the list ascribed to Dr Emanuel and used for their main experiment appears to be a simple deception. (This is yet another example, among many others [9]-[13], of practices which cast grave doubt on MBBK's integrity.)
In this paper, we will examine the following:
Chapter I will discuss MBBK's procedures. Chapter II will deal with statistical evidence for the codes which can be deduced from Dr Emanuel's work. In Chapter III we will investigate the source of the differences between Emanuel's and Havlin's lists.
Chapter I. The Masquerade of Scientific Research
In this chapter we will discover that MBBK's seemingly "independent experiment" was actually conducted by methods that seem like utter deception. MBBK's purpose was twofold: To create conditions which would lead to their experiment failing, and at the same time to conceal an important fact––that in reality Emanuel's real data indicates that WRR's success was due not to "cooking" of names and appellations (as MBBK claim), but to the presence of a genuine code (as we will show in chapter II).
Note: In this chapter we will not criticize Dr Emanuel's data. The following discussion will treat his data as if it is correct. Also, we will use MBBK's terminology "corrected dates", although we do not agree that this is necessarily true.
1. Games people play:
. . . .
= = = = =
And also at:
http://www.torahcodes.co.il/debate1.htm
Concerning the Statistical Test that was Published in our Paper in Statistical Science
MBBK claim in their Stat. Sc. paper that WRR used a permutation test that differed from that agreed upon with Prof. Diaconis, and this was done behind his back.
This response shows that their claim is simply false.
English Version [works at the above link]
= = = = = = =
A New Measurement of the "Famous Rabbis" Sample
Here we report on a new application of a different method of randomization to the measurement of the significance of the correlation in the famous Rabbis sample. The measured significance was found to be 0.0000009. Note that MBBK's complaints concerning the original permutation test – are irrelevant here.
English Version-Hebrew Words In Hebrew Font
= = = = = =
Qx:
CLEARLY, FJ290 a significance of 0.0000009 is extremely beyond the highest normally used in most very rigorous scientific studies.
I realize that TRUE FACTS don't seem to be the issue for naysayers--extremely statistically significant FACTS, BIBLICAL FACTS, or otherwise.
= = = = =
Hey, Faithful Bro. Great to see your screen name.
The best of God's blessings to you and yours.
A good layman's article by a great scholar should follow shortly.
= = = = = = = = = = = =
I don't think the DECISION tree on this code business is all that complex or difficult.
1. There's either SOMETHING going on underneath the surface text of Scriptures that is utterly unique in all of literature or there isn't.
2. IF there is, then the sources are limited:
A) God or
B) satan
3. It's incomprehensible and 100% irrational, to me, That Almighty God who obviously throughout Scripture has cared SOOOOO MUCH about His written Word--it's incomprehensible that He would allow satan to embedd codes underneath the surface text. So, just logically, it can't be satan. Doesn't fit God's character or priorities to have allowed it of satan.
4. Further, The TRULY STATISTICALLY VALID LONG codes affirm THE BASIC CHRISTIAN DOCTRINES about God, about Christ and some could quite reasonably say about Biblical prophecy. That's not really something satan would be likely to do in a truly orthodox Christian or orthodox Jewish fashion.
5. The statistical proof that SOMETHING supernatural IS embedded underneath the Scriptures' surface text is, by now, irrefutable as many links attest.
6. It appears to me that only ignorance and rigid, UNBiblical bias refuses to admit the truth about The Codes.
7. Clearly the codes have not been done as many humans seem likely to have preferred to do them had they been doing them. But GOD DID THEM. And HE USUALLY doesn't do things OUR ways.
Thankfully.
Shaddai's power is unfathomable. Codes are easy for Him...
That's my construction on reality, too.
Thx.
Ho hum. Another after the fact bible code.
Oh?
How is 2004 after 2006?
Respectfully, I disagree. Satan messes around with God's literal Holy Word all the time. Remember, he can quote it as well..evidenced in the Bible. What do you think is happening when aberrant teachers and false prophets are messing around with it??
I realize that TRUE FACTS don't seem to be the issue for naysayers--extremely statistically significant FACTS, BIBLICAL FACTS, or otherwise.
Look, I don't care how many websites you give me supporting this heresy, it doesn't make it a fact. I can give you thousands of websites supporting that the Jehovah Witnesses are grounded in truth. Does that make it so? No, it does not.
The only Bible reading I need to do is what is CLEARLY contained in the pages of Scripture. I don't need some Johnny come lately to the scene telling us he's figured out some new messages contained in the pages thereof, nor do I need to get a magic decoder ring to decipher its pages.
Well D-U-H!!! Wasn't there a particular group of people ticked off at Mel Gibson in 2004 about The Passion of the Christ!
What do you think is happening when aberrant teachers and false prophets are messing around with it??
= = = = =
That's an ENTIRELY VERY DIFFERENT order of "messing around with."
That is not the established text itself in it's established structure and form.
However, I have no illusions of convincing those who refuse to see such an important distinction.
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.