Battle of the Bible Wheels: Catholic vs. Protestant

The spell is broken. I am awake. As discussed in yesterday’s post, Debunking Myself, I can now see, understand, and explain the psychological forces and cognitive errors that led to my false belief in the Bible Wheel. This leaves me with the informative and entertaining task of debunking all the outrageous claims I made during my years as a believer.

Today’s project is to debunk the Bible Wheel Challenge which I believed was invincible proof of my claims. Here is how I stated it:

THE BIBLE WHEEL CHALLENGE asserts that the Christian canon is truly perfect in the twofold sense that 1) no rearrangement of its books would improve upon the patterns discovered on the Bible Wheel, and 2) any rearrangement would cause an obvious degradation of existing patterns. The challenge is for the opponent to suggest a rearrangement and present arguments for why such a change would produce patterns equal to or superior to those presently seen in the Bible Wheel. This challenge simultaneously proves the invincibility of the Bible Wheel even as it demonstrates the vacuity of the skeptic’s canard that “patterns mean nothing because they can be found in anything.” It is an extremely powerful challenge because it can not be refuted without interacting with the data, and the data is the touchstone that proves the Bible Wheel.

This challenge went unanswered for over a decade. No one ever responded to it even though I actively challenged critics on various forums. I interpreted their lack of response as confirmation that it was invincible. It now seems more likely that they didn’t want to waste their time playing my game. Whatever the reason, it was a fallacy to think that a lack of response could be any kind of confirmation, especially since I never actually took the challenge myself! I never doubted my claims were true because I was mesmerized by the mountain of the cherry picked “evidence” I had collected.

As it turns out, I could not have met my own challenge even if I wanted to. The challenge is blatantly absurd because it would be literally impossible to review anything but the tiniest fraction of possible arrangements of the books. This is because the number of possible arrangements is beyond human comprehension. Simple combinatorics tells us that there are 39! x 27! = 2.2 x 1074 possible arrangements (assuming we don’t mix Old and New Testament books). If we considered all possible arrangements, the answer is even larger: 66! = 5.4 x 1092. To get a perspective on the size of these numbers, the number of seconds since the Big Bang is about 4.3 x 1016 and the number of atoms in the observable universe is on the order of 1080.

The essence of my error was a failure to appreciate the magnitude of the numbers involved. It is a textbook case of the Law of Truly Large Numbers, which is one of the five mathematical laws explained by David Hand in his excellent book The Improbability Principle: Why Coincidences, Miracles, and Rare Events Happen Every Day. Here is a brief summation of the law:

A set of mathematical laws that I call the Improbability Principle tells us that we should not be surprised by coincidences. In fact, we should expect coincidences to happen. One of the key strands of the principle is the law of truly large numbers. This law says that given enough opportunities, we should expect a specified event to happen, no matter how unlikely it may be at each opportunity. Sometimes, though, when there are really many opportunities, it can look as if there are only relatively few. This misperception leads us to grossly underestimate the probability of an event: we think something is incredibly unlikely, when it’s actually very likely, perhaps almost certain.

The Improbability Principle explains common errors people make when estimating probabilities which create the illusion of miracles and “supernatural patterns” like the Bible Wheel. A thorough understanding of his book is all that is needed to debunk most of my claims.

The Battle of the Bible Wheels

There is yet another refutation of my Bible Wheel Challenge that is perhaps the most compelling of all, since a picture is, as they say, worth a thousand words. For years, I believed that the Bible Wheel was proof of the Protestant Canon, as opposed to that of the Roman Catholic Church. I just “knew” that the deuterocanonical books would “ruin the pattern.” You couldn’t even make a Bible Wheel since there were too many books! Or so I thought. I never actually analysed the data at all.

Much to my surprise, it is very easy to make a Roman Catholic Bible Wheel. I simply followed the order of books as listed in the Vulgate (same as the Douay-Rheims version), and followed the tradition of counting Jeremiah and Lamentations as one to give a total of 72 books. These books can then be displayed on a wheel of 24 spokes, corresponding to the 24 Greek letters. Thus, the Catholics can claim their Bible is “sealed from Alpha to Omega” just as I claimed that that Protestant canon was “sealed from Aleph to Tav.” Only their claim has a much better ring to it, given that the Alpha and Omega are descriptions of the divine found within the text itself and are ubiquitous in ancient Christian art and literature as seen, for example, in the Chi Rho I placed in the center:

RomanCatholicBibleWheelChiRho

I now have a foil against which to test my claims about the Bible Wheel. How would I have responded when I was a believer? To answer this, I’ll create a dialog between “Me now” and “Me then.” Note: PBW = Protestant Bible Wheel and CBW = Catholic Bible Wheel.

Me now: The PBW is meaningless. I can create the same kind of pattern with the Catholic Bible and the Greek alphabet.

Me then: Yeah, but the CBW doesn’t have a Canon Wheel.

Me now: Score one for the PBW. But the PBW doesn’t match the words of the Bible which speak explicitly of the Alpha and Omega which also have played a very important role in Christian art and literature. And the 24 spokes of the CBW correspond to very significant uses of the numbers 24 and 24/2 = 12 in the Bible, like the 24 elders around the thrown of God and the 144,000 = 24 x 6,000, etc. The number 22 doesn’t play any role in the symbolic numbers of the Bible as far as I know.

Me then: Score one for the CBW. But the number 22 does play an important role in the alphabetic verses which follow the pattern of the 22 letters. There are no alphabetic verses designed upon the Greek alphabet, so you can’t have any alphabetic KeyLinks like I have found in the PBW.

Me now: KeyLinks? There’s been a development in that area. Your claims relating to the Alphabetic KeyLinks collapsed like a house of cards the moment I examined them objectively. I proved that in a series of five posts on our forum (here, here, here, here, and here).

Me then: Oh my. That’s embarrassing. Let’s move on to another question.

Me now: OK. What’s the best spoke on your Bible Wheel?

Me then: The first spoke! It’s totally amazing! It consists of Genesis, Isaiah, and Romans, which are the first books of the Law, the Prophets, and the New Testament Epistles! And there is a strong theme of “creation” that unites them. It’s the best spoke on the PBW. The evidence is very strong.

Me now: I agree that’s pretty impressive. But not nearly as impressive as the first spoke of the CBW which consists of Genesis, Wisdom of Solomon, and the Gospel of John.  Take a look at these correlations:

  • Genesis: In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth.
  • Wisdom:  O God of my fathers, and Lord of mercy, who hast made all things with thy wordAnd ordained man through thy wisdom, that he should have dominion over the creatures which thou hast made,
  • John: In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. The same was in the beginning with God. All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.

Look at that! The Wisdom of Solomon explicitly refers to the Logos by whom all things were made. It coheres perfectly with Genesis and John. I could go on …

Me then: No need. I see your point. There is no limit to the “connections” that can be found no matter how the books are arranged, and more importantly, there is no way to judge between the two Bible Wheels. I know I would have been very impressed by the Catholic Bible Wheel if I were a Catholic looking for “patterns” that proved divine inspiration. And that’s nothing confirmation bias. Thanks for helping me see the error of my ways. I think I’ll be going now. Bye bye.

Conclusion

People are pattern seeking animals. The mere fact that I could display the Bible on a circular matrix surrounded by the alphabet created a powerful illusion of design. It’s very hypnotic. Such patterns obviously connect with some deep psychology since people have been making similar “symbolic circles” for millennia.

When I was a believer, I thought that the probability of the Bible Wheel happening by chance was negligible, and so demanded an explanation (which obviously was God). I continued in this false belief for three full years after debunking the Bible and quitting Christianity. That shows how powerful such illusions can be.

This entry was posted in Christianity, Debunking Myself, Losing My Religion. Bookmark the permalink. Post a comment or leave a trackback: Trackback URL.

17 Comments

  1. David O
    Posted October 31, 2014 at 8:09 pm | Permalink

    This was a very funny and clever way to make a great point.

    I disagree though. The one that drew me to your site was looking up Isaiah as a miniature Bible. I simply googled it as I noticed several of the connections and was hypnotized by them. Our thoughts aren’t original; it’s been noted several times before. Not to say that makes it meaningful – several random people looking at the Mars photo will say it looks like a face independently even though it’s not.

    Being slow witted actually biases me views on this. When I glanced over the other components of your site at the time (the gematria and holograms), I concluded that I was too dumb to pore over Hebrew text, and that those studies were too occultic for me to have the time or ability to unravel.

    But the Isaiah-Bible connection is particularly impressive. Just looking at the “terror, pit, and snare”, the “I am” verses, the song in Chapter 5, the change in tone in Chapter 40, the initial verses of chapter 1 … I find it all rather striking. I thought generally all the wheels on your site were fairly convincing.

    Let’s say we discovered that a short piano piece of some famous composer had 138 measures, and several of the measures sounded like snippets from Beethoven’s corresponding opus numbers. They wouldn’t all have to be. If you just had 10 or 20 such connections, it would be rather obvious that it was intentional. I don’t believe we have to conclude that every book is perfectly linked. It may be that we can only use judgment, and it really seems like the Isaiah-Bible connection is meaningful in my own judgment – your mileage may vary.

    I think to some extent, the work you are doing now falls under the same category of rationalizing that the Bible Wheel site creation did. It seems like you like to be all in on a belief and to iron out any uncomfortable wrinkles. Again, I’m biased by the fact that I enjoy cognitive dissonance and typically prefer things to be very complicated and impossible to pigeonhole. While I share your disgust with the lunatics that infest the religious world and with many aspects of the faith itself, I just can’t feel convinced that the Isaiah-Bible connection falls; it doesn’t pass the simple tried and true sniff test. I’d be open to any convincing!

    I actually think there are reasons why the pattern could exist without it proving that the faith is true. For instance, a brain in a vat theory: it could be an elaborate test to see if people take a stand against apparently fascist beliefs even though they’ll face harsh punishment by doing so. If this theory were true, your particular brain in the vat would be providing information on this topic.

    Anyway, no need to respond since I’m just haphazardly throwing some food for thought out there. I say any of this without malice; I just think as a relatively outside observer and somewhat of a fan, it’s interesting to see how hard you like to consolidate a belief – you go to the mat in on one side, take a 180 degree turn, and then go to the mat on the other. But is that whole middle ground really so uncomfortable?

    And the gospels on that CBW – clean that up!! haha

  2. Posted November 1, 2014 at 10:06 am | Permalink

    Hey there David,

    I really appreciate your thoughtful and challenging comments.

    You suggest that the connections between the chapters of Isaiah and the 66 books of the Bible, though far from complete or perfect, are sufficient to imply a deliberate design by an omniscient and omnipotent God. To support this idea, you point out that we would conclude deliberate design if we found a musical composition in which “several of the measures sounded like snippets from Beethoven’s corresponding opus numbers.” Such a conclusion would be based on two factors. First, the degree of “sound alike.” We would have to have an objective measure of what we mean. For example, if all the “sound alike” portions were note-for-note identical, then we would be forced to conclude deliberate copying if a sufficient number were found. Of course, what would constitute a “sufficient number” would have to be established, but we don’t need to worry about that right now since this is just an analogy anyway.

    The second point is more significant. Why would we conclude that the similarities implied deliberate design? Because we begin with the presupposition that the composition containing the “sound alikes” was itself designed. This exposes the fundamental presupposition underlying belief in the Isaiah-Bible Correlation: It could only have meaning if we began by presuming that both the Bible and Isaiah were designed by God. If we have no reason to believe this, then the coincidences would be far less convincing. For example, if you believed that God governed history and was interested in proving it by planting apparently random “coincidences” in the lives of historical persons, you would be strongly inclined to believe that God “obviously” designed the connections between the presidencies of Lincoln and Kennedy. Here is a brief sample:

    Abraham Lincoln was elected to Congress in 1846.
    John F. Kennedy was elected to Congress in 1946.

    Abraham Lincoln was elected President in 1860.
    John F. Kennedy was elected President in 1960.

    The names Lincoln and Kennedy each contain seven letters.

    Both were particularly concerned with civil rights.

    Both wives lost their children while living in the White House.

    Both Presidents were shot on a Friday.

    Both were shot in the head.

    Lincoln’s secretary, Kennedy, warned him not to go to the theatre.
    Kennedy’s secretary, Lincoln, warned him not to go to Dallas.

    Both were assassinated by Southerners.

    Both were succeeded by Southerners.

    Both successors were named Johnson.

    Etc., etc., etc. The list goes on indefinitely.

    So do you believe that those are “mere coincidences” or are they sufficient to convince you that some sort of supernatural agent designed them? If not, why not? How does that differ from the Isaiah-Bible Correlation?

    Here are a few problems I have with it now that I’m viewing it from a skeptical point of view, without the presupposition that God did it. First, the connections are mostly subjective. Second, it is not nearly as good as it could be. I could have designed one a thousand times better and more convincing. The same idea is what woke me up from the Bible Wheel delusion. Third, connections could be found no matter what order was used. For example, here is a page that presents the Isaiah Bible Correlation as proof of divine design, but it is based on an entirely different order of the books. It follows the order of the Tanakh for the OT and the “manuscript order” of the NT. (This is this same order that E. L. Martin used to construct his symmetric sevenfold pattern based on 49 (=7 x 7) = 22 + 5 + 22 books discussed in my article Patternicity on Steroids). This shows how folks can find patterns in anything. How is anyone supposed to objectively judge between them? The “connections” are almost entirely subjective value judgments. And some of the patterns with the different order are much better than what we find in the order I used. For example, in the KJV order, the Book of Isaiah corresponds to Isaiah 23 which has no connections at all, whereas in the order of the Tanakh, it correspond to chapter 12 where we read:

    Isaiah 12:2 Behold, God is my salvation; I will trust, and not be afraid: for the YAH YHVH is my strength and my song; he also is become my salvation. Therefore with joy shall ye draw water out of the wells of salvation.

    That connects directly with the name Isaiah, which in Hebrew means YHVH has saved. It’s a much better fit. And we see the same thing with Jeremiah, which is book 13 in the Tanakh. It’s primary theme is the downfall of Babylon, which is the primary topic of Isaiah 13 which opens with the words “The burden of Babylon.”

    Finally, we must ask why would God do such a thing? Why would he deliberately design a partial, fragmentary pattern that is fundamentally indistinguishable from random chance? Why would he choose to communicate through a method that mimics the results of cognitive bias? At best, there is a “hint” of design which is far from definitive since different orders create “hints” of similar strength.

    When all is said and done, I see no reason to think that God designed the Isaiah-Bible Correlation.

    I’ll answer you other points in another post. This one is long enough as it is.

    Again, I really appreciate your thoughtful and challenging questions.

    Richard

  3. Posted November 1, 2014 at 11:00 am | Permalink

    Hi again David,

    Continuing with your comments:

    I think to some extent, the work you are doing now falls under the same category of rationalizing that the Bible Wheel site creation did. It seems like you like to be all in on a belief and to iron out any uncomfortable wrinkles. Again, I’m biased by the fact that I enjoy cognitive dissonance and typically prefer things to be very complicated and impossible to pigeonhole. While I share your disgust with the lunatics that infest the religious world and with many aspects of the faith itself, I just can’t feel convinced that the Isaiah-Bible connection falls; it doesn’t pass the simple tried and true sniff test. I’d be open to any convincing!

    I can see how you might get that impression, but I think it is because you have not walked in my shoes. I didn’t just “flip” from one belief to its opposite. On the contrary, it took me three years after debunking the Bible before I had the clarity of mind to debunk the Bible Wheel. I have given it a lot of thought. For three full years, I had a statement on my sidebar that said the evidence supporting the Bible Wheel appeared to remain valid despite the fact that the Bible itself was not true, and I was willing to live with that “cognitive dissonance” as long as those “facts” appeared to be valid.

    I explored many possible explanations, from naturalistic ideas as such as an evolutionary explanation which seemed to make good sense of the Canon Wheel (though it did not explain the detailed correlations between the books with each other and the alphabet) to “woowoo” explanations based on Jungian psychology, as explored in The Bible Wheel as a Cosmic Mandala of Archetypal Wholeness. I remained quite open-minded until I reviewed my evidence for design and found it full of holes, as explained in my recent posts, especially Debunking Myself: The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly.

    I don’t know what makes you think I have trouble with ambiguity. The fact that I was willing to live with the profound inconsistency of a false Bible and true Bible Wheel for three years suggests quite the opposite. I thoroughly enjoyed my studies of quantum mechanics which contains fundamental ambiguities in its foundation (wave/particle duality, etc.). Like Schroedinger, I felt that such ambiguity was fundamental to reality, like the Yin/Yang. I have a strong dislike for “closed systems” that claim to account for all the data but actually fail.

    Again, I really appreciate your comments, and hope the conversation continues.

    Richard

  4. Jack
    Posted November 2, 2014 at 5:34 pm | Permalink

    The fact that there are two wheels, one based on the Hebrew alphabet and the other on the Greek, could be seen as evidence that the Bible was always conceived of as a scroll and that the two traditions split at some point in the past.

  5. David O
    Posted November 2, 2014 at 5:57 pm | Permalink

    That’s all I got Richard! The ball is in my court – I’m going to keep exploring the idea and others such as Ezekiel’s temple, the Israel camps, and the cross. Or the cross-like form of the Lamentations book. I find all these very compelling. I remember how struck I was when I was studying Ezekiel’s temple trying to make sense of it and suddenly seeing the passage about the water running out of it. It had that electrifying effect that you must be all too familiar with; it’s hard to unthank those connections once you see them.

    It seems I’ve mischaracterized your thinking a little. If I read correctly, you’re trying to find ways to test for cognitive bias … without being cognitively biased. Clearly very difficult – if one were to try to think of a litmus test for comparing presidents after reading your passage, it would be tempting to start with something like “What year did they die?” It truly is difficult to unsee patterns once you see them! But to that end, you’re reading books about cognitive bias and trying to apply philosophical concepts. A lot of work, but it seems pretty reasonable.

    I remember at various points in my life, I’d tell people about what I considered to be radiant patterns in the Bible, and they didn’t seem at all interested. I would just tell myself it was because I had eyes to see and ears to hear (funny how it all combines)! But in reality, it’s largely because I’m an actuary, a musician, and a chess enthusiast. I am completely in love with patterns, and that predisposes me to seeing them whether they’re the signal or the noise. It would be no different from overthinking Eliot’s Waste Land or Miles Davis’ Kind of Blue, seeing things the artists didn’t intend.

    If it were all math, we could just do some sort of Bayesian analysis on it, expecting a certain amount of fake patterns to appear in a random walk. But it’s harder to do with text which largely isn’t random.

    So a benefit of your site is it acts like a big diary or journal. You can get a sense for when you intellectually understood something to be true, and when your heart felt it was true. In many cases, the feeling came first, and sometimes it came second!

    Best wishes,
    David

  6. David O
    Posted November 2, 2014 at 6:12 pm | Permalink

    And definitely when seeing this pattern, the first natural instinct is to head right to Isaiah 23 and it is indeed disappointing. It’s difficult to tell how much one-to-one relationship is needed before we can conclude it’s deliberate. At least it shouldn’t matter if you could have designed more correlation as long as there is sufficient correlation that it is extremely improbable it wasn’t deliberate.

    I’m starting to think the answer is less important than the question itself. If it’s possible to deepen understanding of confirmation bias and testing for it, and this provides a vehicle for doing so, I can read your posts and have hope of somebody being as smart as the ‘idiots’ who were never impressed in the first place. ;)

  7. Jack
    Posted November 2, 2014 at 7:08 pm | Permalink

    >Merely rolling up the OT does not make the Bible Wheel.

    That’s not true. It depends on the size. Genesis can be written on an egg:

    google.com/search?q=genesis+written+on+egg

  8. Posted November 2, 2014 at 7:09 pm | Permalink

    The fact that there are two wheels, one based on the Hebrew alphabet and the other on the Greek, could be seen as evidence that the Bible was always conceived of as a scroll and that the two traditions split at some point in the past.

    No, it could not, because there is no evidence that either group did any such thing. The fact that the wheels could be made is best explained by simply coincidence. The two canons just happened to have the right number of books. And if they didn’t, then we could make up reasons to change the count of books like Ernest L. Martin did when he created his novel sevenfold symmetric pattern by following the order of the Tanakh, renumbering the books to reduce them from 24 to the required 22, and then using the “manuscript order” for the NT to arrive at 49 (= 7 x 7) = 22 + 5 + 22 books.

  9. Posted November 2, 2014 at 7:17 pm | Permalink

    That’s all I got Richard! The ball is in my court – I’m going to keep exploring the idea and others such as Ezekiel’s temple, the Israel camps, and the cross. Or the cross-like form of the Lamentations book. I find all these very compelling. I remember how struck I was when I was studying Ezekiel’s temple trying to make sense of it and suddenly seeing the passage about the water running out of it. It had that electrifying effect that you must be all too familiar with; it’s hard to unthank those connections once you see them.

    Yes, I constantly experienced an “electrifying effect” when discovering coincidences that confirmed my beliefs. I called it “holy goosebumps” (a play on the Holy Ghost). This gives deep insight into how people get addicted to pattern finding. It’s like playing the slot machine. You spend hours tediously scanning scripture and then you find a HIT and you get goosebumps and feel like you are perceiving the truth of God. It’s the same kind of “pleasure response” drug addicts get. You get a dopamine rush. I just read an article that explains the same thing happens when people learn new words. Basically, “pattern finding” is like a drug, and gives the same kind of response. Here’s a snippet from the article (link):

    During both word learning and gambling, participants exhibited activity in the ventral striatum, which is a core area involved in reward and motivation. This same region is activated during a wide range of pleasurable activities, such as eating great food, having sex and taking drugs. During word learning activities, synchronization between the cortical language regions and the ventral striatum was also increased. Furthermore, those with better connections between these two circuits were found to be able to learn more words than those with weaker links.

    I’ll answer more in another comment.

  10. Posted November 2, 2014 at 7:28 pm | Permalink

    It seems I’ve mischaracterized your thinking a little. If I read correctly, you’re trying to find ways to test for cognitive bias … without being cognitively biased. Clearly very difficult – if one were to try to think of a litmus test for comparing presidents after reading your passage, it would be tempting to start with something like “What year did they die?” It truly is difficult to unsee patterns once you see them! But to that end, you’re reading books about cognitive bias and trying to apply philosophical concepts. A lot of work, but it seems pretty reasonable.

    We already know how to avoid cognitive bias. It’s called the “scientific method.” You have to look at all the data. Folks who believe in numerology and patterns in the Bible almost never do that. Their primary methods are pure cherry picking and confirmation bias. They look for “hits” that fit a pattern they like and ignore and/or rationalize all the data that doesn’t fit.

    I see no value in looking for patterns in sacred texts that are demonstrably fallacious on countless points. E.g. it’s obvious that the Bible is not true. There was no Adam and Eve. Creation did not happen six thousand years ago. Putting striped sticks in front of mating animals does not cause their offspring to be mottled. Etc., etc., etc. It’s time to toss that old book (as a source of authoritative truth) and move on. It’s a great resource to understand the history of human thoughts, hopes, dreams, and fears, just like this website is a great resource for showing how a person transforms from a believer to a freethinker. But it is worthless as a guide to truth.

  11. Jack
    Posted November 2, 2014 at 7:41 pm | Permalink

    But we’re not talking about random or arbitrary sets, were talking about the sacred holy scriptures of an entire nation. Literature is created by design, with care.

    Out of all the verses in Shakespeare, there are some rhyming couplets. How do you know the rhymes aren’t a coincidence? Because you have better sense then that.

  12. Posted November 2, 2014 at 7:49 pm | Permalink

    And definitely when seeing this pattern, the first natural instinct is to head right to Isaiah 23 and it is indeed disappointing. It’s difficult to tell how much one-to-one relationship is needed before we can conclude it’s deliberate. At least it shouldn’t matter if you could have designed more correlation as long as there is sufficient correlation that it is extremely improbable it wasn’t deliberate.

    As explained in my latest article debunking the Isaiah-Bible Correlation, patterns as good as mine can be found using an entirely different sequence of books. Pay attention to the “disappointment” you felt when you tried to confirm the pattern and failed. That was evidence that the pattern does not actually exist. The “hits” strike you as very compelling because you are looking for them with a believing mind. Would you be impressed by such patterns if you found them in the Qur’an?

    That’s how you free yourself from cognitive bias. Begin by admitting to yourself that you have a HUGE bias in favor of the Bible. That bias is skewing your judgment.

  13. Posted April 26, 2015 at 9:27 am | Permalink

    You digressed richard. Your story lnterested me, because you did ln reverse what l did. Well, sorta.
    When l was a young cat l was turned off by the Christians who were supposed to represent the the
    lntegrity of the word of God. this was a silly notion. Anyway as a result l got lnto the Qabalah and Magick. After many years l came back to Christianity after realising that the bible ltself proves lts
    lntegrity. l encourage you to check out Bill Schneobelen first, then Chuck missler. just google away
    my friend until you see the light. Happy trails lol.

  14. Posted April 26, 2015 at 6:28 pm | Permalink

    After many years l came back to Christianity after realising that the bible ltself proves lts
    lntegrity. l encourage you to check out Bill Schneobelen first, then Chuck missler. just google away
    my friend until you see the light. Happy trails lol.

    Hey there Richard,

    I’ve known about Chuck Missler for over 20 years. His book “Cosmic Codes” struck me as quite shallow. I can’t image he could teach me anything I haven’t already heard from him or learned on my own. As for Bill Schneobelen … WTF?!? He sounds worse than the fraud Mike Warnke. He claims to be a former freaking vampire! Real credible dude.

    So how exactly does the Bible “prove its integrity”? I’m all ears.

  15. Knot
    Posted August 17, 2015 at 12:52 pm | Permalink

    I was comparing the Roman Catholic Bible Wheel with the Protestant Bible Wheel. Although you were able to come up with a diagram representing the Roman Catholic Bible canon, it does not have the symmetry of the Protestant canon wheel. It seems like you were forced to give up all of the compelling symmetry in the original canon wheel. In the RCBW (roman catholic bible wheel), NT history (John and Acts) is grouped with the NT epistles. OT history (1and 2 Mac) is grouped with NT history (John and Acts). Wisdom literature (Wis and Sir) is grouped with the major prophets. The Major prophet/Daniel is grouped with minor prophets.

  16. Posted August 17, 2015 at 7:22 pm | Permalink

    If you review my article, you will note that I addressed the fact that Catholic Bible Wheel does not have symmetry of the Canon Wheel seen in the Protestant Bible. I pointed out that the Catholic Bible Wheel also has significant features not found in the Protestant Bible Wheel. And more significantly, there is no evidence that either wheel is anything but the result of random chance.

  17. Knot
    Posted August 18, 2015 at 9:39 am | Permalink

    ok. thanks. i’m still reading and enjoying all the research you have done.

Post a Comment

Your email is never published nor shared. Required fields are marked *

*
*

You may use these HTML tags and attributes <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>