Questions and comments for Richard (RAM)

[Richard Amiel McGough]

Hey there Bill,

The amount of changes in the NIV since it's first publication in 1984 is truly astounding. Only 61% of the "original" 1984 NIV text remains in the current 2011 version! Look at this graph [source]:

A list of all the changes between those two versions can be viewed here.

This page shows where the word "Christ" was changed to "Messiah" in 60 verses. It also shows the changes in Matthew 1:1 which destroyed the pattern relating the first 14 words to the phrase "The Second Coming" in Bill's New Bible Code.

All the best,

Richard

[thebluetriangle]

Hey there Bill,

The amount of changes in the NIV since it's first publication in 1984 is truly astounding. Only 61% of the "original" 1984 NIV text remains in the current 2011 version! Look at this graph [source]:

A list of all the changes between those two versions can be viewed here.

This page shows where the word "Christ" was changed to "Messiah" in 60 verses. It also shows the changes in Matthew 1:1 which destroyed the pattern relating the first 14 words to the phrase "The Second Coming" in Bill's New Bible Code.

All the best,

Richard

Yes, I know. The code is contained only within the 1984 edition. This is the version 'given' to me (three signs directed me to it) and it is the only version that contains the entire code. Previous editions of the NIV contained some of the code and in fact it began to accumulate within Scripture when the scribes first put pen to parchment. I have found codes in Ezra's lists of returned exiles from Babylon that had no meaning until a) modern English had evolved and b) 9/11 occurred. As the NIV is updated the code, which is for the most part exquisitely dependent on sentence structure, is now being eroded. There won't be much of it left in the 2011 version.

I see the code as a complete thought in the mind of God (existing beyond time) manifesting in our realm over time. It reminds me of David Bohm's implicate and explicate orders. Anything which occurs in the explicate order (our material universe) was first conceived in the implicate (God/heaven/the pleroma//the ground of being/the universal unconscious). So the code was created and also evolved. It's a teleological process, like intelligent design. In fact, to distinguish it from the ID movement I call it 'intelligent evolution' in my website.

PS I forgot to say thanks for the info and link about the changes in the NIV! I'll be able to use that.

[Richard Amiel McGough]

Yes, I know. The code is contained only within the 1984 edition. This is the version 'given' to me (three signs directed me to it) and it is the only version that contains the entire code. Previous editions of the NIV contained some of the code and in fact it began to accumulate within Scripture when the scribes first put pen to parchment. I have found codes in Ezra's lists of returned exiles from Babylon that had no meaning until a) modern English had evolved and b) 9/11 occurred. As the NIV is updated the code, which is for the most part exquisitely dependent on sentence structure, is now being eroded. There won't be much of it left in the 2011 version.

I see the code as a complete thought in the mind of God (existing beyond time) manifesting in our realm over time. It reminds me of David Bohm's implicate and explicate orders. Anything which occurs in the explicate order (our material universe) was first conceived in the implicate (God/heaven/the pleroma//the ground of being/the universal unconscious). So the code was created and also evolved. It's a teleological process, like intelligent design. In fact, to distinguish it from the ID movement I call it 'intelligent evolution' in my website.

PS I forgot to say thanks for the info and link about the changes in the NIV! I'll be able to use that.

Hey there Bill,

I can really relate to the stuff you said about Jungian archetypes and Ultimate Reality as a Dream. It looks like we have a lot of agreement on those points of view. But I don't understand why you would say that those ideas make "objective verifiability an impossibility." Here's what you wrote:

I think you're off with your use of the term 'objective validity', because I believe the world is a creation of a higher consciousness and we are all connected to that consciousness, sharing in a kind of collective dream, where 'objective validity' is impossible. Or in terms of quantum physics the observer is part of the experiment and so scientific objectivity is a myth and thus not really possible even when studying physical phenomena. The code is a communication from outside the dream which we are studying within the dream, and the communication is using the language of the dream to wake us up from it. What I would say is that instead of things having 'objective validity' we all share certain dream symbols and also have our own personal dream symbols. My experiences and the code used both personal and shared symbols in such a way as to enlist me in this work and also show me that my work has universal application. I initially thought myself that my experiences were just for me, but then they began to involve other people (like my Alpha Course director who was given the key), were synchronistically linked to world events and dramatic visions, meetings with 'knowing strangers' (who let me know I was to regard them as angels) and other phenomena, all leading me to the stunning realisation that I had a message to find and deliver.

I agree that "the world is a creation of a higher consciousness and we are all connected to that consciousness, sharing in a kind of collective dream" but I don't see how that make "objective validity impossible." If that were true, then what's the purpose of all the numbers in you book? Aren't you trying to give "objective validity" to what you are saying? And I still don't quite understand what you think the message of the New Bible Code is. It seems like you are predicting some sort of cataclysm to happen soon and that the message of the NBC is important for folks to make it through. Is that correct? If so, that sounds like an "objectively verifiable" claim. It either will happen, or it won't (as has been the case with every other such prediction in the history of the world).

I'd like to cut to the chase if we could. What's the NBC really all about (in practical terms)?

And how does it differ from erroneously seeing meaningful patterns in random data? I haven't seen anything yet that makes me think "Oh, that's a message." I don't see any reason for many of the connections you make, and many of them are based on concepts that I think are fundamentally fallacious (like the whole idea that we are in the "end times" and that there will be a "Second Coming of Christ). And to make claims like "the Manchild was conceived on 9/11" doesn't make a lick of sense to me. How do you know that? What proof do you have? Some number patterns? Why would you think that number patterns are "proof" of something you can't see? Have you ever seen any successful prediction using "number patterns" like those of the NBC? I never have. So why believe them? That's what made Harold Camping go insane. He was ABSOLUTELY CONVINCED that the "time line of history" that he invented (based on all sorts of nutter numerology and other errors) was proof that the Rapture would happen on May 21, 2011. At least his stuff was "objectively verifiable." If he had not been so closed-minded he could have seen the errors of his ways before he was publicly humiliated by "objectively verifiable" Reality.

Please don't misunderstand me. I don't want to "argue" about this at all. I'm just looking for clarity. You are a good writer and obviously very intelligent. I think we have a lot in common but we differ on this one thing, so it could be a very interesting and fruitful conversation.

Great chatting!

Richard

[thebluetriangle]

Hey there Bill,

I can really relate to the stuff you said about Jungian archetypes and Ultimate Reality as a Dream. It looks like we have a lot of agreement on those points of view. But I don't understand why you would say that those ideas make "objective verifiability an impossibility."

The word 'objective' presupposes that something can exist outside the mind. If the universe is a creation of the mind or a consensus reality (a shared dream) then anything in our world was created by the same mind that is studying it and so it can't be objectively real. Now I'm saying that God created the code through us - by manipulation of events to create an English gematria and a Bible code on top of that. So depending on how you define God it either came from us or through us. Either way we created the code, either as the unconscious authors or the pen of the Author. So it doesn't really exist 'out there' - it just appears to. I think of the code more as a work of art than anything else and I don't think therefore that it can truly be analysed to prove it is real, any more than any analysis could prove that a synchronicity is real. It either impacts the conscious mind of the experiencer or it doesn't. Part of the impact is the unlikelihood of a synchronicity occuring and I initially went down that route with the code. But I'm not a probablity theorist and from the evidence of the 'Torah Code' controversy, even if I were I could not prove to the satisfaction of a sceptic that it was real. So I abandoned my initial attempts at showing the code to be statistically improbable, which it is, because that doesn't actually prove anything. Ultimately is the inherent order of and artistic quality in the codes and the meaning they have for the reader that validate them, just like any other synchronicity. I think that's probably how it should be, too. Some people aren't ready to meet God and he respects people's free will, even the free will to disbelieve in him.

I'll get to the rest of it later.

[Richard Amiel McGough]

The word 'objective' presupposes that something can exist outside the mind. If the universe is a creation of the mind or a consensus reality (a shared dream) then anything in our world was created by the same mind that is studying it and so it can't be objectively real. Now I'm saying that God created the code through us - by manipulation of events to create an English gematria and a Bible code on top of that. So depending on how you define God it either came from us or through us. Either way we created the code, either as the unconscious authors or the pen of the Author. So it doesn't really exist 'out there' - it just appears to.

Like I said, I can really appreciate your point of view. But I think you have confused "mind" with "Mind," our human minds with the Cosmic Mind. Objective Reality is plenty Real. Yes, we can influence Reality - especially in as much as it unfolds through us - but that's not the same as saying that Reality is just a "concensus." Yes, it is like a "shared dream" but that "dream" is being "shared" with all Reality. The Mind is not subject to any human mind.

I find it strange that you reject objective Reality when it comes to the NBC but not when you cross the street. Why the double standard?

I'm still pretty confident that the "codes" I have studied (the Bible Wheel and Gematria) would still stand up under rigorous "objective verification."

I think of the code more as a work of art than anything else and I don't think therefore that it can truly be analysed to prove it is real, any more than any analysis could prove that a synchronicity is real. It either impacts the conscious mind of the experiencer or it doesn't. Part of the impact is the unlikelihood of a synchronicity occuring and I initially went down that route with the code. But I'm not a probablity theorist and from the evidence of the 'Torah Code' controversy, even if I were I could not prove to the satisfaction of a sceptic that it was real. So I abandoned my initial attempts at showing the code to be statistically improbable, which it is, because that doesn't actually prove anything. Ultimately is the inherent order of and artistic quality in the codes and the meaning they have for the reader that validate them, just like any other synchronicity. I think that's probably how it should be, too. Some people aren't ready to meet God and he respects people's free will, even the free will to disbelieve in him.

I'll get to the rest of it later.

Well, that "work of art" seems exceedingly ideosynchratic to me. And that's fine, of course, but you seem to think that is has some "objective validity" or you wouldn't be trying to share it with others, would you?

The think about the "artistic associations" you make is that "art" is singularly notorious for being subjective. Just go to any modern gallery. Your work has not made sense to me because I don't have any particular interest in 9/11 (I think it's just part of our world, not that special) or in the Pope, or in the "Second Coming" and certainly not the "end times." So there is really nothing about it that makes sense to me. The number patterns don't look good either because are built off sentence fragments.

But don't worry if I don't get it! If nothing else, I hope I can help you understand why some folks don't get what you are talking about. I hope that's helpful to you in your journey.

And I want to repeat that we have a lot in common, so these kinds of conversations could be very fruitful. We are sufficiently similar to be able to communicate well with each other, and sufficiently different to have lots to talk about. That's a good combo, eh?

Great chatting,

Richard

[Timmy]

Isn't art, in whatever form, the only truly believable religion there is?

i'm extrapolating xianity from the above equation...because i can, whereas nothing else is objective reality here, but merely a segment in this work of arte'.

Buckaroo Timbucktwo

[Richard Amiel McGough]

Isn't art, in whatever form, the only truly believable religion there is?

i'm extrapolating xianity from the above equation...because i can, whereas nothing else is objective reality here, but merely a segment in this work of arte'.

Buckaroo Timbucktwo

Were you deliberately quoting William Blake, or did you accidentally channel him? Here's a few of his quotes:

"Prayer is the study of art; praise is the practice of art; fasting, etc., all relate to art."

"a poet, a painter, a musician, an architect; a man or woman who is not one of these is not a Christian."

"Jesus and his apostles and disciples were all artists."

[Timmy]

Were you deliberately quoting William Blake, or did you accidentally channel him? Here's a few of his quotes:

"Prayer is the study of art; praise is the practice of art; fasting, etc., all relate to art."

"a poet, a painter, a musician, an architect; a man or woman who is not one of these is not a Christian."

"Jesus and his apostles and disciples were all artists."

It must be residual effects from surfing the Akashic Channel Network earlier cuz that waz not yet a parcel in this consciousness.


Timothy leery

[Ps 27:1]

Hi Bill,

Your last post was very interesting and there is much I would like to discuss with you, but before doing that I need to clear up some confusion about the results you have posted. I created a little javascript page that calculates the ordinal, standard, reduced, and combined values of any English text so I could confirm you results. You can see it here:

http://biblewheel.com/gr/englishgematria.htm

Hi Richard, Thank you very much for posting that. Could you do a separate column for just ord + std. I never calculated the reduced values. I saw the 1309 for Lord Jesus Christ back in 1999. It is interesting to me that adding the r values makes it 1374 because of the factor 229. Last spring I had calc. Aslan = 47(ord), 182(std), 229 (combined). At the time, I saw 47 as the reflection of Jesus 74(ord) and 182 as the reflection of 281 = lamb(Gk std) found first in Rev 5:6 with 182 letters in the verse which really caught my attention. For awhile, I didn't find anything significant about 229. Well, one day a colleague that I ate lunch with, said his truck just died by the side of the road at 229,000 miles. Shortly thereafter, he said again that his truck "just gave up the ghost" at 229,000. I never told him about my interest in the #229. Later, maybe during the summer, I was talking to one of my neighbors and she mentioned this house for sale on the entrance to our subdivision that was remodeled by someone with HGTV. She asked me if I knew how much they were asking and when I told her no, she said 229,000 dollars and that they would never get it because of the economy and the houses in our sub are in the 140-180,000 range. Well, now seeing that 6x229 = 1374 = Lord Jesus Christ total is neat for me so thank you again. One more piece in the puzzle. There are 7 words that = 1374 and the 1st and 7th are especially int. given their context. Ps 77:7 = 1374. Ps 77 has several meanings for me. My parking space at school was 77 and the first 7 verses of that ch described many of my night experiences.

Is Ps 77:7 the only 777 possibility? If so, that is cool. When I clicked Ps 77:7, I saw it was verse # 15,101. Well, you know that is going to get me excited because of the 101. So I entered 15,101 and I get:

Rev 3:8 I know thy works: behold, I have set before thee an open door, and no man can shut it: for thou hast a little strength, and hast kept my word, and hast not denied my name.

Also, using your calculator, my full legal name is 194 (ord) 1229(std) 77(r) and 1500(total) My last name has std value of 373 and my firstborn, Michelle (fem of Michael), lives in zip code 37073

Hey Bill: Interesting thing about the crow. My experiences last year were centered around the movie, Voyage of the Dawn Treader. Dawn = 555 (std) and the 1st word in the bible = 555 is:

תנין tanniyn {tan-neen'} or תנים tanniym (Ezek 29:3) {tan-neem'} intensive from the same as 08565; TWOT - 2528b; n m AV - dragon 21, serpent 3, whale 3, sea monster 1; 28 1) dragon, serpent, sea monster 1a) dragon or dinosaur 1b) sea or river monster 1c) serpent, venomous snake

The ship is built in the form of a dragon. I had changed my checking account Dec 2010, the time the movie came out and the last 3 digits on my new account are 555. Also, I found out that the verses in KJV are 15551+15551. On the poster, Aslan has the image of the ship in his eyes. Change the 1 to I and you get I555I +I555I. So, if you rightly divide the Word of God, it will dawn(555) in your eyes (I---I + I---I). I don't understand why nobody thinks that's clever.

Anyways, back to the crow. When the ship and crew head into dark island, the ship's mast makes a silhoutte of a cross. They find the 7th lord with his sword, get him on board, but then Edmund thinks of the sea monster. Eustace( as the dragon), fights the monster and the deranged lord heaves and strikes Eustace with the 7th sword. Eustace flies away, but gets transformed back to a boy by Aslan and is able to lay the last sword on the table. Meanwhile, the crew is fighting a losing battle with the sea serpent/ monster. Edmund with his flashlight and Peter's sword, Rhindon, goes inside the ship's dragon head mouth to distract the SS. The SS bites the head off, but Edmund escapes. Then Edmund climbs up to the crow's nest and shines the light at the SS to draw it to himself. The last strategy by Caspian and the crew below had just failed. Finally, Rhindon lights up blue and as the SS goes to devour Edmund, Edmund thrusts Rhindon up inside the serpent's mouth and kills it.

One day I was explaining to my younger daughter and son-in-law the cross silhoutte and that it was only Edmund with the blue Rhindon (the Holy Spirit through the word of God) in the crow's nest (on the cross) that was able to defeat the serpent. When I got to the crow's nest part, my son -in-law laughed and said a crow just landed outside the patio door on the sandbox. I was facing the opp. direction, so I turned around, and sure enough, there was the crow. A week or 2 later, I was explaining the same thing to a couple I had met at a messianic service. It was after the service and we were sitting in the foyer. Again, when I got to the crow's nest part, the lady laughed and said look, a crow just flew down to the door (it was an all glass door). 1st time, maybe a coincidence. 2nd time, that got my attention and shook me up a bit.

One more time, in case anyone missed it. Rhindon = 271 and Is 27:1 sounds just like the battle scene and Edmund had Ps 27:1
It is all about the cross, brothers and sisters.

Blessings,
Steve

[Richard Amiel McGough]

Your last post was very interesting and there is much I would like to discuss with you, but before doing that I need to clear up some confusion about the results you have posted. I created a little javascript page that calculates the ordinal, standard, reduced, and combined values of any English text so I could confirm you results. You can see it here:

http://biblewheel.com/gr/englishgematria.htm

Hi Richard, Thank you very much for posting that. Could you do a separate column for just ord + std. I never calculated the reduced values.

Hey there my friend,

I'm glad you like the new tool. It is has been updated as you requested.

I saw the 1309 for Lord Jesus Christ back in 1999. It is interesting to me that adding the r values makes it 1374 because of the factor 229. Last spring I had calc. Aslan = 47(ord), 182(std), 229 (combined). At the time, I saw 47 as the reflection of Jesus 74(ord) and 182 as the reflection of 281 = lamb(Gk std) found first in Rev 5:6 with 182 letters in the verse which really caught my attention. For awhile, I didn't find anything significant about 229. Well, one day a colleague that I ate lunch with, said his truck just died by the side of the road at 229,000 miles. Shortly thereafter, he said again that his truck "just gave up the ghost" at 229,000. I never told him about my interest in the #229. Later, maybe during the summer, I was talking to one of my neighbors and she mentioned this house for sale on the entrance to our subdivision that was remodeled by someone with HGTV. She asked me if I knew how much they were asking and when I told her no, she said 229,000 dollars and that they would never get it because of the economy and the houses in our sub are in the 140-180,000 range. Well, now seeing that 6x229 = 1374 = Lord Jesus Christ total is neat for me so thank you again. One more piece in the puzzle. There are 7 words that = 1374 and the 1st and 7th are especially int. given their context. Ps 77:7 = 1374. Ps 77 has several meanings for me. My parking space at school was 77 and the first 7 verses of that ch described many of my night experiences.

Well, I personally don't see any significance in that collection of numbers, but if it works for you, great!

The thing is, there's an "confirmation bias." Some random number gets you attention, and then when it randomly happens again you notice it. This is a very common phenomenon. Many folks start noticing repeated numbers like 111 or 222 and then they start "seeing them everywhere." The fact is, they were always there and folks just didn't notice. You could probably do it with any number. It would be an interesting experiment. I found this description of this fallacy on Science Daily [source]:

Confirmation bias is a type of cognitive bias and represents an error of inductive inference toward confirmation of the hypothesis under study.
Confirmation bias is a phenomenon wherein decision makers have been shown to actively seek out and assign more weight to evidence that confirms their hypothesis, and ignore or underweigh evidence that could disconfirm their hypothesis.


As such, it can be thought of as a form of selection bias in collecting evidence.

This is probably the most common error folks interested in gematria fall into.

Is Ps 77:7 the only 777 possibility? If so, that is cool.

No. There is one other:

Numbers 7:77 and as the sacrifice of peace offerings: two oxen, five rams, five male goats, and five male lambs in their first year. This was the offering of Pagiel the son of Ocran.

You can search for any particular verse number pattern in my database by putting an asterisk (*) in the book number field. That's how I found the verse above. For example, if you wanted to look at all the 3:16 verses in the Bible, you would enter *, 3, 16 into the book, chapter, and verse fields in the database, like this.

When I clicked Ps 77:7, I saw it was verse # 15,101. Well, you know that is going to get me excited because of the 101. So I entered 15,101 and I get:

Rev 3:8 I know thy works: behold, I have set before thee an open door, and no man can shut it: for thou hast a little strength, and hast kept my word, and hast not denied my name.

Well, I can see why that would be meaningful to you. That kind of interaction with the text opens your mind to allow it to touch you in a new way. Like using the I Ching or Tarot cards. It opens you up to your intuitive mind.

Also, using your calculator, my full legal name is 194 (ord) 1229(std) 77(r) and 1500(total) My last name has std value of 373 and my firstborn, Michelle (fem of Michael), lives in zip code 37073

I've always advised folks to avoid analysis of their own names because it can lead them into a self-absorbing vortex. An unprincipled search for associations in a mountain of random numbers does not lead to any authentic insight. But the process can lead to insight into your own psyche I suppose, much like a Rorschach Ink blot test. And you might be "onto something" for all I know, so please don't take this the wrong way. I can see why many of these numbers have struck you as significant.

Hey Bill: Interesting thing about the crow. My experiences last year were centered around the movie, Voyage of the Dawn Treader. Dawn = 555 (std) and the 1st word in the bible = 555 is:

תנין tanniyn {tan-neen'} or תנים tanniym (Ezek 29:3) {tan-neem'} intensive from the same as 08565; TWOT - 2528b; n m AV - dragon 21, serpent 3, whale 3, sea monster 1; 28 1) dragon, serpent, sea monster 1a) dragon or dinosaur 1b) sea or river monster 1c) serpent, venomous snake

The ship is built in the form of a dragon. I had changed my checking account Dec 2010, the time the movie came out and the last 3 digits on my new account are 555. Also, I found out that the verses in KJV are 15551+15551. On the poster, Aslan has the image of the ship in his eyes. Change the 1 to I and you get I555I +I555I. So, if you rightly divide the Word of God, it will dawn(555) in your eyes (I---I + I---I). I don't understand why nobody thinks that's clever.

I think it's kinda clever. But cleverness with Gematria can be a drawback because you are mixing what should be serious research with goofy fun. Unless of course you understand that you are just playing with numbers like a kid finger-painting.

There is a reason that serious studies are called DISCIPLINES. The are supposed to be guided by PRINCIPLES. Else all we have is CHAOS --- or maybe ART. There is such a thing as too much disciple! And we don't want to forget about the importance of acausal principles like SYNCHRONICITY and INTUITION.

One day I was explaining to my younger daughter and son-in-law the cross silhoutte and that it was only Edmund with the blue Rhindon (the Holy Spirit through the word of God) in the crow's nest (on the cross) that was able to defeat the serpent. When I got to the crow's nest part, my son -in-law laughed and said a crow just landed outside the patio door on the sandbox. I was facing the opp. direction, so I turned around, and sure enough, there was the crow. A week or 2 later, I was explaining the same thing to a couple I had met at a messianic service. It was after the service and we were sitting in the foyer. Again, when I got to the crow's nest part, the lady laughed and said look, a crow just flew down to the door (it was an all glass door). 1st time, maybe a coincidence. 2nd time, that got my attention and shook me up a bit.

That's a great synchronicity!

One more time, in case anyone missed it. Rhindon = 271 and Is 27:1 sounds just like the battle scene and Edmund had Ps 27:1
It is all about the cross, brothers and sisters.

Blessings,
Steve

I can see why you find that significant!

Have a great day.

Richard