Lord Jesus Christ - Gematria 3168

**HeIsLord** · 04-29-2012, 08:17 AM

Amazing connections to gematria of "Lord Jesus Christ" 3168:

Bethlehem is located precisely at 31.68 degrees North.

If you fitted a square that encompassed the circumference of the Earth it would have four sides of length 3,168 x 10 miles.

Proof of encompassing square length:

EARTH'S
CIRCUMFERENCE
Kms Miles
Equator 40,075 24,901
Polar 40,008 24,860

EARTH'S
DIAMETER
Kms Miles
Equator 12,756 7,926
Polar 12,735 7,913

Average Diameter: 7,919.9

Four Sided Square: 31,679

Rounded: 3168 x 10

More detail on my blog: www.biblenumbersforlife.com (see 3.0 Lessons)

**Richard Amiel McGough** · 04-29-2012, 07:57 PM

Originally Posted by HeIsLord

Amazing connections to gematria of "Lord Jesus Christ" 3168:

Bethlehem is located precisely at 31.68 degrees North.

That's not true. Google Earth shows Bethlehem at 31^o 42' 20.68" which corresponds to 31.705744^o in decimal.

The decimal position of 31.68° corresponds to 31° 40' 47.9994" which is entirely outside of the town of Bethlehem. It's about 2 miles south in a hilly region where no one lives.

Originally Posted by HeIsLord

If you fitted a square that encompassed the circumference of the Earth it would have four sides of length 3,168 x 10 miles.

Proof of encompassing square length:

EARTH'S
CIRCUMFERENCE
Kms Miles
Equator 40,075 24,901
Polar 40,008 24,860

EARTH'S
DIAMETER
Kms Miles
Equator 12,756 7,926
Polar 12,735 7,913

Average Diameter: 7,919.9

Four Sided Square: 31,679

Rounded: 3168 x 10

More detail on my blog: www.biblenumbersforlife.com (see 3.0 Lessons)

Where did you get those numbers? NASA reports these numbers:

Mean Radius:
Metric: 6,371.00 km
English: 3,958.8 miles

That means that the average diameter is 7917.6 miles and the four sided square has a perimeter of 4 x 7917.6 = 31670.4 miles. That is exactly 3167.04 x 10 which is almost exactly 3167 x 10. It does not round to 3168 x 10.

I don't know who first introduced these errors, but all the results you have presented have been popularized by Bonnie Gaunt in her book The Bible's Awesome Bible Code!. I own four of her books, and all them are riddled with egregious errors in both fact and logic. They are entirely untrustworthy and worse than worthless because they mislead people. Consider the irony! Christians claim to follow Jesus who is the Truth, and to have the Holy Spirit to guide them "into all truth." How then is it possible that they are willing to propagate such obvious errors and ridiculous falsehoods? How do they expect any intelligent person to believe them when they don't even bother to check the numbers for themselves? Why don't they understand that they are discrediting the Gospel when they make false statements?

**HeIsLord** · 04-30-2012, 07:30 AM

RAM,

Ridicule does not suit a moderator. Let's be gentlemen and present our facts and let the reader decide.

I appreciate your information. In my mind of faith, 2 miles South of Bethlehem in the hilly country could have been the place Jesus was born since he was out of town at the time, or the place where the shepherds saw the angels.

Concerning the Earth's measurements, my calculation is a simple approximation. I don't know how God measures things, whether He takes the average of Polar and Equator circumferences or whether he consults Nasa. I also don't know whether he uses sea level or whether he adds the height of all the land mass averaged over the surface of the Earth. The point is the square of the Earth is very very close to 3168 x 10 miles when you use my measurement.

**Richard Amiel McGough** · 04-30-2012, 08:34 AM

Originally Posted by HeIsLord

RAM,

Ridicule does not suit a moderator. Let's be gentlemen and present our facts and let the reader decide.

I appreciate your information. In my mind of faith, 2 miles South of Bethlehem in the hilly country could have been the place Jesus was born since he was out of town at the time, or the place where the shepherds saw the angels.

Concerning the Earth's measurements, my calculation is a simple approximation. I don't know how God measures things, whether He takes the average of Polar and Equator circumferences or whether he consults Nasa. I also don't know whether he uses sea level or whether he adds the height of all the land mass averaged over the surface of the Earth. The point is the square of the Earth is very very close to 3168 x 10 miles when you use my measurement.

Hey there HeIsLord,

I reviewed my post and didn't notice any ridicule. I'm sorry it seemed that way to you. Granted, I did speak plainly about the numerical errors and unreliability of Bonnie's books, but that seemed important because books like hers have spread so much misinformation.

You originally asserted that "Bethlehem is located precisely at 31.68 degrees North." That's simply not true. It doesn't make any sense to then make up the idea that Jesus was really born 2 miles outside of Bethlehem merely because it fits what you want to believe. You presented the numbers as evidence of the truth of the Bible. What good is the evidence if it is not true and must be adjusted to fit your "mind of faith"?

As for your approximation about the earth's measurements: Where did you get your numbers? Why do you think they are accurate? I got my numbers from NASA because they are presumably the most accurate. I mean, NASA couldn't get a rocket to the moon if their numbers weren't accurate, you know. But you are correct, there are lots of ambiguities and unknowns. Did they use sea level or average land height? How much of a difference would that make? Would it be sufficient to make your approximation accurate?

The reason Bonnie's books are so bad is because she was willing to fudge the numbers to fit the patterns she wanted to find. In the world of intellect, that is about the worst crime a researcher can commit. It makes all of her work suspect and untrustworthy. In any other field, a researcher found behaving that way would be rejected from the scientific community.

The real problem is Bonnie's methodology. Why did she introduce the idea of the perimeter of a square around the earth? Why didn't she use an equilateral triangle, a pentagon, or some other figure like a three dimensional cube? The answer is simple - she used a square because she needed to multiply the diameter of the earth by 4 to get the number 31680. If she needed to multiply by three, she could have used a triangle. In other words, she picked a pattern because it fit the pattern she wanted to "find". This is called "post hoc" reasoning. It has no real meaning at all and would never convince anyone who understands logic.

All the very best,

Richard

**highflyertoo** · 04-30-2012, 05:39 PM

Gematria was borrowed from the Assyrians (Ruler Sargon 2 built a wall in cubits in correspondence to his name) ,which was later used by the Hebrews to try and reveal and explauin various things such as places and names as you are doing.

According to gematria the lucky number for Jews is 18 because the word Chia ''life'' adds up to 18.

As Richard the moderator said,people make patterns to fit patterns. Here for example is a pattern. The name Nero adds up to 666 when using gematria,And we know the world has not ended...

I believe gematria is a distraction used to keep people mystified in suspicion.

**Richard Amiel McGough** · 05-01-2012, 01:02 PM

Originally Posted by highflyertoo

Gematria was borrowed from the Assyrians (Ruler Sargon 2 built a wall in cubits in correspondence to his name) ,which was later used by the Hebrews to try and reveal and explauin various things such as places and names as you are doing.

According to gematria the lucky number for Jews is 18 because the word Chia ''life'' adds up to 18.

As Richard the moderator said,people make patterns to fit patterns. Here for example is a pattern. The name Nero adds up to 666 when using gematria,And we know the world has not ended...

I believe gematria is a distraction used to keep people mystified in suspicion.

Almost all the gematria I have seen (with the notable exception of Vernon Jenkins) has been very poorly done and is pretty much meaningless. But the topic caught my interest back in the early 1990s and when I applied my mathematically trained mind to it, I found patterns that seemed, and still seem, to demand explanation. I called them "holographs" because they have the self-reflective property like fractals and holographs, by which I mean that the same pattern is seen reiterated at different levels within the verse. For example, the Shema, aka the "greatest commandment," is built upon nested multiples of the number 13:

Deut 6:4 Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God is one LORD:

echad (One) = 13
YHVH (The LORD) = 26 = 2 x 13
YHVH echad (The Lord is one) = 39 = 3 x 13
Sum of Shema = 1118 = 86 x 13

Furthermore, the number 86 is the value of Elohim, the word translated as "God" in Genesis 1:1, so the sum of the Shema = 13 (One) x 86 (God) which reiterates the meaning of the whole verse. This number has three factors, (2, 13, 43) and these three numbers for three binary pairs that sum to the three fundamental names of God:

YHVH = 2 x 13
Elohim = 2 x 43
The Father (Greek) = 13 x 43

I put all this information together into an image which I call the Unity Holograph:

I have found similar structures in Genesis 1:1-5, John 1:1-5, Exodus 20 (the Ten Commandments) and Hebrews 4:12 (see my Gallery of Biblical Holographs). I have no explanation for how they got there. It seems unlikely that such structures happened by chance. But neither do I believe they were deliberately designed by any human. I used this as proof that God designed them but I don't believe that anymore so I am left with a profound mystery. I have the same problem with the Bible Wheel.

I tried sharing these results with Christians over the last decade and on various forums and received nothing but mindless moronic mockery and abuse. Unfortunately, no one was able to show any error in the logic and facts that I presented, so all the evidence remains. I just don't know what it all means. I would be very interested if anyone could find and explanation of these patterns because they mystify me.

**HeIsLord** · 05-13-2012, 01:44 PM

Dear fellow seeker after truth RAM,

What has been determined from our interchange is that there is the real possibility given the geography of the area of Bethlehem that Jesus was born outside of town at exactly the spot 31 degrees and 68 minutes. If true, this is a remarkable coincidence since the gematria of Jesus Christ is 3168.

Your obsession with the detail has caused you to miss the big picture. You strain out a gnat but you miss the weightier things of the law. I was incorrect because I indicated Bethlehem was 31,68 whereas I should have written "the spot of Jesus birth" was very close to 31,68. I admit my mistake. But you leap on the misquote and in the process you miss the point. You say you have rejected Christianity because you have analyzed the Bible and found some details that don't make sense to you. You are throwing out the big message of God's love for fallen man and God's provision of a Savior because you have a problem with the some details somewhere in a gigantic text of 30,000 plus verses.

It is astounding to hear that in all your years you only consider your research and Jenkins research into gematria to be of any value. Really? With respect, I must suggest you think a bit too highly of yourself. I would suggest for example that Peter Bluer has done exemplary work, many, many others as well.

As far as Bonnie Grant is concerned, I don't agree with her conclusions or her Christiology. The important thing is she saw the hand of God at work in the numbers in the Bible. Bonnie is not perfect, Ivan Panin is not perfect (poor guy has a corrupted text to work with). But, all these imperfect saints were awe inspired by the patterns of numbers they found in Scripture. In that respect, I humbly add my name to the list of the imperfect worshipers.

I do apologize for being hasty and not careful about my 3168 post. I have been busy on my farm, and in my haste made a mistake.

HeIsLord

**Richard Amiel McGough** · 05-13-2012, 04:20 PM

Originally Posted by HeIsLord

Dear fellow seeker after truth RAM,

What has been determined from our interchange is that there is the real possibility given the geography of the area of Bethlehem that Jesus was born outside of town at exactly the spot 31 degrees and 68 minutes. If true, this is a remarkable coincidence since the gematria of Jesus Christ is 3168.

Your obsession with the detail has caused you to miss the big picture. You strain out a gnat but you miss the weightier things of the law. I was incorrect because I indicated Bethlehem was 31,68 whereas I should have written "the spot of Jesus birth" was very close to 31,68. I admit my mistake. But you leap on the misquote and in the process you miss the point. You say you have rejected Christianity because you have analyzed the Bible and found some details that don't make sense to you. You are throwing out the big message of God's love for fallen man and God's provision of a Savior because you have a problem with the some details somewhere in a gigantic text of 30,000 plus verses.

It is astounding to hear that in all your years you only consider your research and Jenkins research into gematria to be of any value. Really? With respect, I must suggest you think a bit too highly of yourself. I would suggest for example that Peter Bluer has done exemplary work, many, many others as well.

As far as Bonnie Grant is concerned, I don't agree with her conclusions or her Christiology. The important thing is she saw the hand of God at work in the numbers in the Bible. Bonnie is not perfect, Ivan Panin is not perfect (poor guy has a corrupted text to work with). But, all these imperfect saints were awe inspired by the patterns of numbers they found in Scripture. In that respect, I humbly add my name to the list of the imperfect worshipers.

I do apologize for being hasty and not careful about my 3168 post. I have been busy on my farm, and in my haste made a mistake.

HeIsLord

Hey there HeIsLord,

I'm glad you mentioned Peter Bluer. I would have included him in my list if I were trying to be comprehensive but he slipped my mind. His work is very good. He and I communicated a few years ago. He collaborated with Vernon Jenkins and I have his book "373 - a proof set in stone." We all came to many of the same conclusions. But he is the only one I would recommend off the top of my head. If you know of any others who have done good work on gematria, please share them with us.

The most famous Christian work on gematria is Theomatics and their methodology is fundamentally flawed. Their habit of adding or subtracting one or two from the actual numerical values destroyed the primary patterns and made it possible to make everything fit anything. This is because primes are randomly distributed relative to arithmetic sequences. E.g. consider the prime factorizations of these sequential numbers:

886 = 2 x 443
887 = prime
888 = 2 x 2 x 2 x 3 x 37
889 = 7 x 127
890 = 2 x 5 x 89

See all those numbers? That's what you get when you factorize arithmetic sequences - a random splatter of primes. In their book, they equated those four numbers with 888 because they fell within +/-2. And worse, they even used multiples which multiplied the errors. For example, on page 64 they wanted to make a connection between Jesus and the number 111. They wrote:

Jesus = 111 x 8 (888)
Christ'' = 111 x 12

The two apostrophes after Christ mean "within 2." So they were talking about a number that is in the range from 1330 to 1334 (since 111 x 12 = 1332). But they also had many choices for the word "Christ" since they totally ignored all grammar and inflection. Therefore, they had these four numbers to choose from:

χριστος = 1480 (nominative)
χριστου = 1680 (genitive)
χριστον = 1330 (accusative) <=== the one they chose.
χριστω = 2010 (dative)

But that's just the beginning! Given that they were looking for numbers that were +/-2, they could create a much larger set to select from. Here's the list (don't worry, I didn't waste my time doing the factorizations, I have a program for that). The real values of the actual words are written in bold:

1478 = 2 x 739
1479 = 3 x 17 x 29
1480 = 2 x 2 x 2 x 5 x 37
1481 = Prime
1482 = 2 x 3 x 13 x 19
1678 = 2 x 839
1679 = 23 x 73
1680 = 2 x 2 x 2 x 2 x 3 x 5 x 7
1681 = 41 x 41
1682 = 2 x 29 x 29
1328 = 2 x 2 x 2 x 2 x 83
1329 = 3 x 443
1330 = 2 x 5 x 7 x 19
1331 = 11 x 11 x 11
1332 = 2 x 2 x 3 x 3 x 37 <===== The number they picked because 1330 + 2 = 111 x 12.
2008 = 2 x 2 x 2 x 251
2009 = 7 x 7 x 41
2010 = 2 x 3 x 5 x 67
2011 = Prime
2012 = 2 x 2 x 503

Now according to their methodology, all of those numbers can relate to "Christ" and anytime anyone finds a number they like, they can associate it with the word "Christ" if it shares a common divisor with one of those numbers.

Now think about the amount of randomness we are witnessing here. First, we ignore grammar and take any form of the Greek word. This usually gives four possibilities for nouns. Then we create four new numbers from each of those numbers by including all that fall withing +/-2. That means we have 20 numbers available now, and then we FACTOR those numbers which gives us a random set of primes to play with. Simply stated, their system is absurd. You'd never get rocket to the moon with math like that.

I wrote to Dell Washburn about the errors in his system and he said he wasn't interested because he was done "debating" Theomatics.

Another example of ludicrous Christian gematria is the book The Pattern and the Prophecy by James Harrison. I ordered it back in 1996 and was very excited to read it ... until I read it. It was abysmal. I wrote Harrison a long letter explaining all the egregious errors. I won't bother you with the details, but in his answer to me he said that he had burned all the remaining copies of his book.

Bonnie Gaunt's books are of the same class as Harrison's.

My rejection of those gross errors does not mean I think too highly of myself. Believe me, I know how fallible I am, just like everyone else. One of the reasons their errors gall me so much is that I've been educated in mathematics and physics so I learned how to think clearly on such matters. But it's not about me or my intelligence - it doesn't take a genius to identify that stuff as crap.

Now on to the other matters you raised. It seems odd that you would criticize me as "obsessed with detail" given that the results you have shared on this forum are nothing if not "detailed." The real reason you are upset with my precision is because it effectively debunks the false claims made by mathematically ignorant Christians trying to "prove the faith." They don't realize the damage they are doing. The errors are totally obvious to anyone with understanding and so they are actually driving intelligent people away from the faith, and encouraging the ignorant to make themselves look like fools when they enthusiastically share this stuff in their efforts to evangelize.

There's much more I could say, but this post is too long as it is.

All the best,

Richard