Trigger Points To War

TIMOTHY SNODGRASS NEWSLETTER ^ | 16 MAR 2003 | TIMOTHY SNODGRASS

[Quix]

SOME PREDICTIONS ABOUT THE JEWISH YEAR 2005/6 PREDICTING GOD'S JUDGMENT ON THE EARTH.

HERE: http://www.ad2004.com/Biblecodes/Hebrewmatrix/Year5760.html

[Starwind]

PLEASE CHECK OUT THIS URL FOR A BEFORE-THE-FACT PREDICTION FROM A CODE:

HERE: http://www.ad2004.com/Biblecodes/articles/matrixmethod.pdf

From the article you cite:

A Scientific Proof for the Validity of the Bible Codes NEW 2/12/2003
Moshe Aharon Shak has put together a 6-page paper outlining the methodology he used to create the Washington Sniper matrix and Israeli Elections matrix.

Quix, that paper is about methodology. It does not contain, nor does it claim to be a biblically testable predictive proof. Further, it describes a different election outcome than was "predicted" previously in the paper it references:

The paper which that paper references which was published before the elections concludes:

Today (Jan 10, 2003), three weeks before the election, the matrix is very accurate on many issues about this coming election. However, Israeli politics can be extremely unpredictable and volatile. Moshe Katzav was elected as President in 2000. Untiul the night before peopel went to vote, everyone was sure that Peres would win! There were surprises in other general elections in th epast due to unforeseen developments. Even if this matrix fails to paint the right picture of the final election results for January 2003, it already paints an excellent picture of what the January 2003 elections are like [ but no better than a Jan 10, 2003 newspaper].

Quix you have yet to provide the proof Bible Codes predicted the Columbia disaster before hand, and you are now just posting a meaningless series of Bible Code workups which I doubt you've read let alone thought about, none of which are a biblically testable predictive prophecy for which you yourself claimed we should be testing.

Some day the Lord Jesus is going to directly ask you "Quix? Why did you persist in posting falsehoods about what is in my Word and the Holy Spirit's sovereign choice over whom shall receive the gift of Prophecy?

What are you going to tell Him, Quix?

[Quix]

Am tired and still haven't found the shuttle Code.

Only made it to Nov 2002 Digest.

And I don't recall where the initial ref was.

But my chest is threatening to gunk up again and I'm going to bed.

However, I believe I did furnish your requested 1 predictive Code before the event in the earlier URLS I send you.

Blessings,

[Starwind]

Have recalled that it was in a book. I think a Rick Joyner's book but I'm not sure.

I would very much appreciate your posting only proofs of the authentic predictive bible code prophecies. Please skip anything you're not sure of. I don't appreciate being lead along with guesswork subsituted for what you said was biblically testable predictive prophecy.

You were, previously - on this and several other threads, sure that Bible Codes are prophecy and predict the future. You even cited the Columbia disaster as one specific testable bible code prophecy.

Quix, I have read Joyner's books. There is nothing in them about the Columbia. There is nothing in your post #53 about the Columbia. But you knew that.

You're forcing me to choose from either of two equally unpalatable conclusions; that you are either posting deceptions, or that you lack the wisdom and discernment to recognize deception.

I'd like to think you have been both honest and discerning, so, please, as you previously agreed, post:

a biblically testable authentic predictive prophecy from the Bible Codes

two Old Testament cases where an authentic prophet of The Lord missed it.

[Quix]

I have read varying lengths of different ones.

I certainly haven't examined which ones would meet my notion of extreme improbability by chance.

I offer them more or less at face value as stated in their headlines.

I'm not worried at all about Jesus challenging me on a useless thing, much less a false thing about the Codes.

There being something valid going on in the Codes and me being able to convince you amidst my other priorities may be two very different things.

I think your risk of a TYPE II error is much greater than my risk of a TYPE I error.

[Quix]

Joyner's book IF it was Joyner's book--was the one mentioning Old Testament prophets missing it at least twice.

I have posted what I read as Biblically testable Codes which were predictive beforehand. You have not responded to them.

The one about the snipers and the fear of Wash DC are two.

Good night.

[DouglasKC]

Timothy Snodgrass was very specific in prophesizing that a 9.0 plus earthquake would strike somewhere in western North America in the latter part of 2002. It did not happen of course.

He may be sincere, but he doesn't have a very good track record for a prophet.

[Quix]

I spend a lot of time on here.

But I have a lot of priorities.

I prefer to earnestly try and meet your queries--honestly and with integrity.

But I'm not marching to your drum. I deal with my priorities and my timelines as best as I prayerfully can.

If that's not suitable to you, I guess you'll have to ignore it or get over it.

I sift through vast amounts of data routinely and always have. I suppose it would have been better to have made notes in an easily searchable computer journal the last 24 years. But I didn't develope that habit. And, sadly, sometimes, sources I thought at the time would be easy to return to end up not so. It's both our loss.

It doesn't mean idiocy, lack of integrity or deceptiveness.

[Quix]

I STRONGLY AGREE WITH YOU.

Doing so in tongues makes it much more functional to pray always, too.

[185JHP]

Yes. We've got work to do. "May the Lord Our God be with us, and let us go up."

[Quix]

Understand.

Before the deadline--about a month I think before the deadline he became certain in his own mind and posted same that God intervened by breaking up supernaturally or with a UFO craft the huge meteor which Tim was certain would have caused the 9.0 quake had it hit the surface intact.

He also apologized later for not giving the option of God's mercy more credence.

Some say this is on the order of Jonah's initial prophecy for Ninevah not coming true.

In any case, I'm not satisfied with the state of current prophetic voices either. But I am willing to give a lot of grace as long as their hearts and lives seem to be wholly for The Lord of The Bible.

[Quix]

Yes and amen!

[Quix]

Have given you two examples of Codes predicting ahead of time--particularly interesting is the sniper one. You have ignored it. You asked for one. There's at least two including that one and the related one about Washington living in fear.

The ones about Saddam could likely be included relatively soon. We shall see.

I have not found the other shuttle one from a web search either. I have sent a query to the Digest people. Perhaps they will respond. It's conceivable but I don't think it was the one about the Challenger earlier. I think it was one pointing toward the Columbia from 3 years ago. Will see eventually if it's tracked down.

Until then, you can deal with the sniper one or not as you wish. Or, you can rest in smugness based on whatever you wish to construe to support it.

The Old Testament prophet issue--either I'll eventually get the Gentile book recommended or I'll reread the Old Testament again myself. Niether is likely to happen quickly.

Cheers.

[Quix]

FOR WHATEVER IT'S WORTH TO FOLKS--THE FOLLOWING IS A GOOD DISCUSSION OF THE ISSUES:

---

The following was found at URL:

http://asalizaki.freeservers.com/faqe.htm

---

E. How do you know the codes are not just by chance?

1.Can codes be statistically proven to be significant?
2. Is it true that "you can find anything, anywhere" with ELS?
3. What does "minimum skip" mean?
4. How do you know if a code is significant?
5.What is the criteria for determining whether a code is significant or not?
6.Does the text the codes are found in have any relevance to the codes?
7.Can all the codes found in the Bible be duplicated by any text similar in size?

Question E1: Can codes be statistically proven to be significant?


There are two groups of people who have been arguing this question for the last 5 years. Doron Witzum, Eliyahu Rips, and Yoav Rosenburg, 3 Israeli Scientists, had their report about Equidistant Letter Sequences in the book of Genesis published in Statistical Science (a peer-reviewed Science Journal) in 1994 (. The report concluded that the pattern of word-pairs found in close proximity to each other in Genesis was statistically significant, which suggests Divine Inspiration.

The second group are the scientists Brendan McKay, Dror Bar-Natan, Maya Bar-Hillel, and Gil Kalai (referred to as MBBK), who have sought to refute the work of WRR (Witzum, Rips, and Rosenberg) on the issue. Their refutation to the WRR report was published in the May 1999 issue of Statistical Science ). The report discusses alleged flaws in the statistics used by WRR in the 1994 report. The McKay report was a big deal for skeptics of the codes, because it was the first formal, scientific report that refuted the codes.

Since that time, Harold Gans, a highly qualified codes researcher (and former cryptanalyst with the National Security Agency) has written a A Primer on the Torah Codes Controversy for Laymen in which he addresses the points raised by MBBK. In this author's opinion, Gans successfully demonstrates that MBBK have not refuted WRR's work. In addition, Gans describes additional Bible codes experiments which have been performed by WRR and himself which continue to show statistically highly significant results. Rather than delving into the intricate details of the original WRR paper, the MBBK "refutation", and the Gans response, readers are invited to use the provided links to read the primary sources themselves.

Question E2: Is it true that "You can find anything, anywhere" with ELS?


This is the view held by the skeptics. It is not true. Yes, you can find any small word, and even some bigger words encoded in books like Moby Dick and War and Peace, or any large book. However, you cannot find complex code matrixes as are found all over the place in the Bible.

First, it isn't entirely true that you can find "anything," "anywhere" with ELS. There is a classic example. The Hebrew phrase, "God Encoded, God is Truth" is 14 letters. It is found encoded at an ELS of 1032 in the book of Genesis. Never, is this phrase found in War and Peace, and never have we heard of anything near 14 letters being found encoded in Moby Dick. Also, in a randomized version of the Tanach, we tried searching from -35,000 to 35,000, and the phrase was not found.

This is the main problem with the skeptics. When they learn that the term "Torah" (for example) can be found a thousand times in War and Peace, they assume that you can find complex code matrixes in those books. A complex code matrix consists of many thematically related terms that are all found together. There is not a pattern of complex ELS codes in any book, other than the Bible.

---

Question E3: What does "minimum skip" mean?

"Minimum Skip," "Minimum ELS," and "Minimum Interval" are all the same thing for those who don't know. With ELS codes, it is a basic "law" that the lower the skip distance (interval), the more significant the code is likely to be. The lower the skip distance, the less likely the code is there by chance.

When somebody says that he has found a word encoded at "minimum skip" in the book of Genesis, that means he found that word encoded at the lowest interval that it is ever found at in Genesis.

Because short 3-5 letter words can be found so many times by chance, if a word like that is an essential part of the code, it MUST be found at an extremely low skip distance. The longer the word, the higher of a skip distance is allowed. If you find a short word like "Rabin" at an ELS of over 30,000 that is obviously not significant, and just there by chance.

The Issue Of Near-Minimality

Author: Keith York


The articleThe Truth About The Bible Codes contains the following statement concerning criteria for judging whether a matrix is a valid code array or not. "What criteria distinguish an array consisting of a random pattern of ELS's occurring by chance from an array consisting of deliberately encoded ELS's? There is a general consensus among Bible code experts that significant or valid arrays share the following characteristics. They consist of two or more related words that demonstrate the foreknowledge of God, where these words are both compact and in close proximity to each other in a two-dimensional array. In addition, near-minimality in skip distance of an ELS is considered significant." The last sentence of this statement is the subject now under consideration.

Before considering near-minimality, we must first distinguish between a two-dimensional Bible codes array (which is the subject of the above paragraph) and a one-dimensional Bible codes cluster. AsThe Truth About The Bible Codes states, "There have been a few cases in which a word can be found as an ELS more frequently than expected by chance in a small localized part of the text when that word is particularly relevant to the passage in question." This is what I term a one-dimensional cluster. By this I mean that the statistical effect being measured is not dependent upon any parameters that arise from a two-dimensional array such as geometrical compactness or proximity within the array. Rather, the statistical effect comes from the one-dimensional nature of the surface text. A particular ELS will have a given skip distance regardless of the line length of an array it may happen to be in. Also, two ELS's will have a set distance from each other in the surface text independent of how close or far apart they are in a two-dimensional array. By contrast, parameters such as geometrical compactness and proximity within an array depend upon the line length of an array. Jeffrey Satinover's Cracking The Bible Code (1997, William Morrow and Company, Inc.) gives a number of examples of this phenomenon I call one-dimensional clustering on pp. 33-40, 120-129, and 143-147. The Torah Codes And Israel Today (1996, Lev Eliyahu) by Robert Haralick and Matityahu Glazerson also contain examples of this. That book's statistical analysis consists of finding the shortest passage in which every one of a list's related words can be found as ELS's and then looking at parameters such as shared letters and shared skip distances. Ed Sherman and Dave Swaney of www.biblecodecritic.com take the following approach. Given a list of ELS's, designate the most improbable as the focal code and analyze the probability that each other ELS of a given skip distance or less would come at least as close as it does to the focal code in the surface text by chance. As mentioned above, skip distance and surface text proximity are one-dimensional parameters in that they are independent of an array's line length. Geometrical compactness and proximity of ELS's within an array are two-dimensional parameters in that they are dependent on an array's line length.

What the above paragraph implies is that there are a number of different classes of Bible codes, some of which are more suited to one type of analysis and some of which are more suited to another type of analysis. Code clusters are simply the term I apply to those Bible codes most suitable to analysis of one-dimensional parameters, while code arrays are simply the term I apply to those Bible codes most suitable to analysis of two-dimensional parameters. Given this fact, the following question is asked of two-dimensional code arrays: how important is near-minimality of skip distance? Is it essential that every ELS in an array be near-minimal? This is what the research team of Doron Witztum, Eliyahu Rips, and Yoav Rosenberg (hereafter referred to as WRR), who published "Equidistant Letter Sequences in the Book of Genesis" in Statistical Science in 1994 claim. Furthermore, most of the examples shown in Jeffrey Satinover's Cracking The Bible Code (1997, William Morrow and Company, Inc.) involve ELS's which are near-minimal in skip distance. However, this view has not been universally held among codes proponents. A contrasting position is that it is only essential for the central term (and maybe a few others) to be near-minimal in skip distance, while other ELS's are required only to be geometrically compact and in close proximity. That has been the view often presented at this and other sites, and a view that I myself once held.

Even if it is essential that every ELS in an array be near-minimal in skip distance, just what exactly does "near-minimal" mean? How far does an ELS have to get from being minimal to cease being "near-minimal"? I have recently come up with what I believe to be an answer that is at once satisfactory (in that it accounts for what is observed in numerous arrays), defensible (in that it is in agreement with what WRR have been proposing and that the limits do not appear to be arbitrary), and easily stated (the rules are easily stated, easily understood, easily applied, and unambiguous).

If you remember from WRR's 1994 paper, they searched for the 10 shortest skip distance occurrences in Genesis of each ELS in their search list. They did not consider surface text appearances (those with + 1 skip distance), but only those whose absolute skip distance was greater than or equal to 2. The Tanach (the Christian Old Testament) is 15.3 times the length of Genesis, so it stands to reason that the 153 shortest skip distance occurrences of any word in the Tanach (not counting surface text appearances) would be equivalent to the 10 shortest in Genesis.

WRR ignored surface text appearances in their paper for technical reasons, but there have been reported arrays by Satinover and others where surface text words were considered an integral part of the array. Thus when surface text appearances of a word are part of an array, they should be considered near-minimal.

WRR also elaborated on another aspect of near-minimality in their 1994 paper. For any occurrence of an ELS there is a value T, which they designate the domain of minimality. T is the amount of text (or fraction of Genesis in their paper) for which no shorter skip distance occurrence of this particular ELS occurs. The farther the occurrence is from being near-minimal, the smaller the domain of minimality is likely to be. If an ELS spans a portion of text which contains a shorter skip distance occurrence of that same word, then the longer skip distance occurrence does not have a domain of minimality. (In other words, say 'dog' is your ELS with d at letter position 100, o at 125, and g at 150. Say that a shorter skip distance occurrence of 'dog' occurs within this span of text with d at position 110, o at position 116, and g at position 122. Since the shorter skip distance occurrence of the word is completely contained within the portion of text spanned by the longer skip distance occurrence of the word, it can be said that the longer skip distance ELS of 'dog' does not have a domain of minimality.) This suggests a third criterion for an ELS to be considered "near-minimal". If the portion of text spanned by an ELS occurrence of a word does not also completely contain a shorter skip distance occurrence of that same word, then it is to be considered as "near-minimal".

The three-fold test can be stated like this. If an ELS meets any of the three following criteria, it is to be considered as "near-minimal" in skip distance: (1) it is a surface text appearance, i.e. having a +1 skip distance; OR (2) it is one of the 153 shortest skip distance occurrences (not counting surface text appearances) of that word in the Tanach; OR (3) the portion of text spanned by that ELS does not completely contain a shorter skip distance occurrence of that same word.

For the time being, the preceding three-fold test will be considered as a prerequisite for all future publication of arrays submitted to this site. In other words, before a codes researcher submits an array for publication at this site, he should check that every ELS in the array meets one of the three criteria of "near-minimality". If it does not, one can always submit it to another site for consideration, and potential codes researchers are encouraged to do so. The exception to this rule will be if the submitting person is able to provide statistical analysis that convinces me that the ELS's in his array that are not "near-minimal" are indeed statistically significant. I realize that this is a major departure from past practice at this site and that I speak for myself and not necessarily each and every staff member at this site nor even other codes proponents whom we respect and whose sites we provide links to. Though every ELS in an array being near-minimal will not ensure that the array is indeed statistically significant, this threshold requirement will serve to "weed out" those arrays which upon detailed analysis would prove not to be statistically significant.

Can I state dogmatically that ONLY "near-minimal" ELS's are significant in code arrays? No. It is clear from published and statistically analyzed results that this is not the case for code clusters. It may also be the case that "near-minimals" are only one subclass of arrays, just as arrays and clusters are two broad classes of codes. However, that only "near-minimals" are valid is the claim of some of the most prominent codes researchers concerning code arrays, and it is my belief that this is an aspect of the codes which those of us who are codes "popularizers" have ignored for too long. I have increasingly come to the conclusion in recent months that "near-minimality" is indeed an important aspect of code arrays. I hope to further demonstrate the rationales behind this conclusion in some soon-to-come articles and case studies that I will publish here. I thus would ask the reader to stay receptive to this concept and stay tuned for future articles. Is "near-minimality" an essential prerequisite for an ELS to be a valid part of a code array? I do not know. However, what I do know is this. It may be that there is another subclass of code arrays that do not use "near-minimals", but this can only be demonstrated by the use of statistical analyses and/or control text studies. Thus I challenge other codes proponents at their sites to state their case using statistical analysis and control studies. Codes proponents such as Witztum, Rips, and Rosenberg and their associates such as Harold Gans rely heavily upon statistics in their analysis of the codes, but besides the people at www.biblecodecritic.com (who examine code clusters rather than arrays), most of the rest of us have ignored statistics. That should change. Let the debate begin.

As a final note, it has to be noted that other prominent codes researchers disagree with me. While I will use this site to present my perspective on the codes, I also believe it is only fair to the reader to provide links to selected sites with other perspectives when I believe they have posted noteworthy items. Thus the News section will include not only articles presenting my perspective but also important developments presenting others' perspectives. In this way, I hope to balance two roles: (1) advocacy of what I believe to be an accurate view of the nature of the codes, and (2) notification to the reader of important developments in codes research. While it may be a fine line to walk, I will try my best to be fair.



Question E4: How do you know if a code is significant?


This is a common question, and an answer we want to get out to everybody. The reason, is because 75% of all code findings that people send us are not significant, and could probably be duplicated by other books. The following is a simple criteria for determining whether a particular code finding is significant.

Since statistical analysis is valid but difficult to perform, we offer the following as simple logic. If someone found 10 words that are each found only once in the entire Bible, and all 10 of them were found in the same chapter, and they all described the same event, then obviously that code is significant. Or, if you find a complex code that cannot be found in another book similar in size, then that is probably significant as well. This is further expounded in What is the criteria for determining whether or not a code is significant?


Question E5: What is the criteria for determining whether or not a code is significant?


In order to determine if codes are significant, you must use statistical analysis. However, since statistical analysis is valid but difficult to perform, we offer the following as simple logic. For example: If someone found 10 words that are each found only once in the entire Bible, and all 10 of them were found in the same chapter, and they all described the same event, then obviously that code is significant. There are basically three main types of significant codes. The first and most common type of significant code is a complex code matrix, and it must meet 4 simple criteria:

A. Complex Code Matrix
A "significant" ELS Code, (one that is probably not there by chance), is one that meets the following criteria:
1. There must be several encoded words or phrases that all specifically and thematically relate to each other.
2. All of those words must be found encoded in a small area or portion of the text.
3. The code must describe in detail an event or something about a person or place.
4. The code must reveal a prophetic foreknowledge of the future.

The reason why we cannot give specific numbers, is because it depends on what you've found. "How big can the small area or portion of text be?" It depends on how many words you find, and the size (number of letters) of the words. You can find many examples of codes in the Bible that easily meet these four criteria.

B.Words or Phrases Encoded in a Relevant Area of Scripture
A second type of code that can be considered significant, is one with several words encoded many times at low or minimal intervals, all in an area of text that talks about something related to the encoded word. This type of code many times meets the criteria for the first type of code as well. Minimal interval means the occurrence of a particular code with the lowest interval (that particular code never appears with a lower interval). Lower intervals are always more significant. You must be careful with these codes though. Finding a few 3-4 letter words crossing a phrase in the surface text of scripture is not significant. One good way to test it, is to see if you can find those same words crossing any phrase in the Bible, or if it can be duplicated by another book.

C. A Pattern of Words or Phrases Consistently Being Found Together
A final type of code that can be considered significant, is one with related words or phrases that all appear encoded within a small area of text at low or minimal intervals, and all the words have the exact same interval, or are linked together in some other way. Then this pattern is consistently found throughout the Bible. There are not many of these types of codes, but there are a few.

---

Question E6: Does the text the codes are found in have any relevance to the codes?

Yes it can, but it does not have to. If you find a code in a certain area of text that has nothing to do with the theme of the code, that does not harm the code's significance at all. Most codes are not found in an area of scripture that is relevant to the theme of the code. However, finding a code in an area that is relevant can add to the significance of the code.

Always proceed with caution though, because this is a topic that is often misused. If you find one or two short words encoded across a phrase of surface text that is related, it means nothing. You've got to find multiple words encoded that can't be found just anywhere, all found near this area of surface text. If a lot of, or most of your code is made up of words in the surface text, than it is not a code at all. Skeptics of the Bible who try to duplicate the codes found in the Bible will sometimes find a phrase in Moby Dick about blood or death, and then find a single word like "Rabin" (who was assassinated) crossing that and calling it a code. If a good portion of your code consists of words in the surface text, then it is not a significant code. If all of this seems hard to understand, just remember: Words and phrases in the surface text ADD to a code, they do not MAKE the code.

Question E7: Can all the codes found in the Bible be duplicated by any book similar in size?


Absolutely not. This is obviously the view held by most skeptics. While encoded words can be found in any large text, you can only find statistically significant complex code matrices in the Bible.

[Starwind]

Have given you two examples of Codes predicting ahead of time--particularly interesting is the sniper one. You have ignored it.

No I didn't ignore it. In fact I studied it better than you did. (sigh) Quix, from the link in your post #58:

e-mail sent October 28, 2002
From: Morris Shak
To: Dave Swaney; Roy Reinold; Walter York
Sent Monday, October 28, 2003 9:30 PM
Subject: Re: Washington sniper(s)

Hi Dave;
I have now found the names of the accused in the matrix....blood on Malvo's hand...Malvo in the matrix..

Quix; "now found"! The bible code researcher knew in advance what he was looking for! He found Malvo's name. He was looking for it after the fact of it being published! It wasn't predicted, it was encoded afterwards! Quix! Snap out of it man! Wake up and face facts.

And here is an excerpt from a timeline on the Washington DC sniper case dated 4 days earlier with Malvo's & Muhammad names publicized.

On Thursday morning, October 24, 2002, at 3:19 AM, two men were taken into police custody. John Allen Muhammad, 42, and Lee Malvo, 17, were arrested, while in the process of trying to sleep in their car in a Frederick County, Maryland rest area, off I-70. After a tip from a priest in which he heard a confession of the killing, there had been an APB put out for New Jersey 1990 blue Caprice with a license plate of  N2A21Z. Shortly after hearing that message on the radio, a man drove in to a rest area, where he spotted the vehicle, and called authorities.

The whole country was on the look out for Malvo and Muhammad, 4 days before your matrices were encoded with their names.

You couldn't find the proof that bible codes predicted the Columbia disaster, and now can't even remember where or when such proof existed.

You attempt to substitute proof that bible codes predicted the Beltway Snipers ahead of time, yet your "proof" is 4 days older than published facts.

Quix, charitably, your 'proofs' consistently fail to be predictive, and your posts fail to be focused. They aren't in advance of otherwise unknown events, you never found the shuttle proof you assured me was available, and you've not posted the two examples of authentic prophets of the Lord 'missing it'.

But I think you know that, and you compensate by posting a lot of extraneous matrices which avoid the central failed premise of bible codes: The bible codes have no authentic testable predictive biblical prohecy value. One truthful post from you would have laid this to rest. Instead you supply hundreds of deceived posts.

You admonish all to 'test' but provide nothing testable.

Further, by trying to shoehorn snipers and shuttles and whatnot into the Bible, you are dangerously close to adding to or taking away from the Bible.

If you spent half as much time reading the Bible sequentially rather than up, down and diagonally, you'd have a far greater grasp of the Bible's authentic prophecy than this comic book version you've set up as an idol.

Thank you, but I'll not spend further time reading your 'evidence'.

[Quix]

You probably shouldn't read this just received email, either. I'll check on the sniper thing. I still have a memory that the initial part of it I was talking about was discovered well ahead of any known such. Blessings, ---------- Original-Sender: Lawrence Wulff at FSGate Subject : Fw:Amazing prophecy concerning Israel # 2 Author: "Peter Booth" at lfa-internet Jim Bramlett Dec 19, 2002 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Dear friends: The below is copied from the Five Doves site, December 20, 2002. This story is lso attributed to Barbara Richmond, and reported by Timothy Snodgrass. About 2-3 years ago, Barbara had told me about Rosemary Schindler, Oscar Schindler's niece, and that she was a Spirit-filled Christian. But I did not know the story about the Christian Arab lady described below. Both these two amazing prophecies concerning Israel point to the Spring of 2003. Jim ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ November 2002, Prophetic Word & Visitation, Future Word Given Regarding Fulfillment Of Time - Transcribed from Barbara Richmond's tape "The Book and the Sword" - November 2002: A few months ago, I was in California as a guest of Rosemary Schindler, Oscar Schindler's niece. She has a very good friend who is a spirit filled Christian Arab lady who just so happens to be related to some people in very high government positions in Jordan - today's Jordan. We stayed at her home, and she brought out a great big notebook and she said, "I don't share this with anyone unless the Lord allows me to, but I know that I'm suppose to tell you and you have my permission to share this as God leads you." She said, "Years ago my great aunt, who was illiterate, just a peasant farm woman in the country side in rural Jordan loved God with all of her heart. She was filled with the Spirit in the 1920's. In 1933 my aunt had a series of visitations from the Lord, she couldn't read the bible, she couldn't write, but the Lord appeared to her 7 times altogether over a period of several weeks. He spoke to her and she dictated to her son, who could write, for him to write down what the Lord had spoken to her. The Lord said to her on the 1st visitation, "In 15 years Israel will be born again". 1933 + 15 years is 1948. God is telling this to an Arab, a Christian Arab who loves God and loves the Word. He told her a number of other things, and I don't have the whole paper with me because I hadn't planned on doing this. But I have enough of it up here in my head. The thing that is most important that I want to get to, in light of the prophecies from the Rabbi of 1882, is that the last visitation that this Arab woman had in 1933, in Jordan, in the Springtime. The very last thing the Lord said to her was, "70 years from now all will be fulfilled." 70 years from the Spring of 1933 is the Spring of 2003 - Passover is in the Spring. Now time will tell if both this lady and the Rabbi are right, but the book of Proverbs says listen to the Prophets. In the mouth of 2 or 3 witnesses shall anything be confirmed. I'll tell you what this girl is doing---I am living like HE is at the door! From: - For Your Glory, Inc., P.O. Box 724, Woodland Park, Colorado, 80866-0724

[Quix]

OOOOOPS. But I think I DID preview. Oh well. Didn't realize the email carets would be seen as tags

---

Original-Sender: Lawrence Wulff at FSGate

Subject : Fw:Amazing prophecy concerning Israel # 2
Author: "Peter Booth"

ephraim@iinet.net.au


at lfa-internet

Jim Bramlett
Dec 19, 2002

---

Dear friends:

The below is copied from the Five Doves site, December 20, 2002. This story is lso attributed to Barbara Richmond, and reported by Timothy Snodgrass.

About 2-3 years ago, Barbara had told me about Rosemary Schindler, Oscar Schindler's niece, and that she was a Spirit-filled Christian. But I did not know the story about the Christian Arab lady described below.

Both these two amazing prophecies concerning Israel point to the Spring of 2003.
Jim

---

November 2002, Prophetic Word & Visitation, Future Word Given Regarding Fulfillment Of Time - Transcribed from Barbara Richmond's tape "The Book and the Sword" - November 2002:

A few months ago, I was in California as a guest of Rosemary Schindler, Oscar Schindler's niece. She has a very good friend who is a spirit filled Christian Arab lady who just so happens to be related to some people in very high government positions in Jordan - today's Jordan. We stayed at her home, and she brought out a great big notebook and she said, "I don't share this with anyone unless the Lord allows me to, but I know that I'm suppose to tell you and you have my permission to share this as God leads you."

She said, "Years ago my great aunt, who was illiterate, just a peasant farm woman in the country side in rural Jordan loved God with all of her heart. She was filled with the Spirit in the 1920's. In 1933 my aunt had a series of visitations from the Lord, she couldn't read the bible, she couldn't write, but the Lord appeared to her 7 times altogether over a period of several weeks.

He spoke to her and she dictated to her son, who could write, for him to write down what the Lord had spoken to her. The Lord said to her on the 1st visitation, "In 15 years Israel will be born again". 1933 + 15 years is 1948.
God is telling this to an Arab, a Christian Arab who loves God and loves the Word. He told her a number of other things, and I don't have the whole paper with me because I hadn't planned on doing this. But I have enough of it up here in my head. The thing that is most important that I want to get to, in light of the prophecies from the Rabbi of 1882, is that the last visitation that this Arab woman had in 1933, in Jordan, in the Springtime. The very last thing
the Lord said to her was, "70 years from now all will be fulfilled." 70 years from the Spring of 1933 is the Spring of 2003 - Passover is in the Spring.

Now time will tell if both this lady and the Rabbi are right, but the book of Proverbs says listen to the Prophets. In the mouth of 2 or 3 witnesses shall anything be confirmed. I'll tell you what this girl is doing---I am living like HE is at the door!

From: - For Your Glory, Inc.,
P.O. Box 724, Woodland Park,
Colorado,
80866-0724

[Quix]

I also don't recall you dealing with the whole fallacy of your contention in the first place.

The Codes have been there for more than 2,000 years.

Discovering them before OR after the fact of an doesn't alter their having been there beforehand.

[Quix]

YOU
COULD ALSO
BE
UHHHH
MORE
ACCURATE,
TO PUT IT CHARITABLY.

AT:

HERE: http://www.biblecodedigest.com/page.php/137

Teen sniper suspect John Lee Malvo was indicted as an adult

in late January

for his role in the Washington area shootings last fall. The charges mean he could face the death penalty. They also confirm what Bible codes said about Malvo's role as the shooter in at least some of the killings.

Montreal researcher Moshe Shak found codes pointing to the 17-year-old suspect

in late October.

We published a report on all of his findings a month after that

in the December issue.

Then, four weeks later, on December 22, prosecutors announced that evidence pointed to Malvo as the shooter in most if not all of the shootings.

But it appears that your interest is NOT really in the facts anyway.

Keeping a death grip on your biases can become tiring as well as hazardous.

[Quix]

THAT IS,

THE PRIOR OCTOBER, DECEMBER ETC.