I was challenged by a person to look, with an open mind, at the claims of The Bible Wheel; those claims basically add up to the following:

The Protestant Canon of Scripture was divinely inspired, thus excluding Catholic and Orthodox.

It was all very mathematical, complex and convoluted so I don't want to take my time in trying to understand it to refute it; I was hoping someone here had already come across a good debunking article or website.

Here is the website:

www.biblewheel.com

On two occasions, with this Protestant person, I have been trying to get the hows and whys of the origins of the Bible Wheel and he finally provided the following:

Here is Richard's account of how he discovered the wheel, quoted from a theology forum.

"Here's the short form of how I discovered it. Before I was Christian, I was very interested in all things spiritual, and had learned about the Jewish tradition that the Hebrew alphabet was full of symbolic meanings. This became an area of intense research, and as I was trying to systematize my understanding, I fell upon this quote from one of the oldest Jewish religious texts in existence, the Sepher Yetzirah:


Sepher Yetzirah
Twenty-two Foundation letters: He engraved them, He carved them, He permuted them, He weighed them, He transformed them, and with them He depicted all that was formed and all that would be formed.

Twenty-two Foundation letters: He placed them in a circle (galgal) like a wall with 231 gates. The Circle oscillates back and forth.


© source where applicable


I talk about this more in my article called An Ancient Witness.

The word for circle is Galgal = 66 by gematria, the Number of Books in the Bible. It is the root of Golgotha (Skull) which points to the central theme of the whole Bible. It is cognate with Galah meaning "to reveal" which points to the the essence of the Bible as God's Revelation. I could go on and on and on ....

So anyway, when I saw this quote, I followed its suggestion and put the 22 Hebrew letters in a circle and began recording their associated meanings on the 22 Spokes. I drew the meanings from Scripture, and as I did so I noticed that the information about the Letters I had written on the Spokes was tracking with major themes of the first few books, so I added those themes on the Spokes as part of the symbolic meaning associated with the Letters.

Then one day it just dawned on me that the whole Bible would fit on the Wheel. And that was it. The Bible Wheel was born. The year was 1995.

As you can see, the process was very organic and had nothing to do with "looking for patterns" in the Bible per se. I was seeking a systematic understanding of the Hebrew Alphabet, this led to the Books, and then the Bible Wheel emerged.

I then studied the pattern of the Bible Wheel, looking at major themes on each Spoke and how they related to the corresponding Hebrew letter. I was in a constant state of amazement throughout those five years.

Then in June 2000 - five years after the initial discovery - I noticed that Genesis was the first book of the Law and Isaiah was the first book of the prophets, and that both these books are on Spoke 1. This hadn't occured to me before because I was not in the habit of thinking about the Bible in terms of canonical divisions (its rarely emphasised in Bible studies.)

Then I noticed that Romans was the first book of the NT Epistles, and I really began to intuit that something big was going on. By the end of the day, I sat stunned in utter amazement as I gazed upon the sevenfold symmetric perfection of the Holy Bible. I knew the history of how I discovered it, and that's what impresses my mind so strongly. I know with absolute certainty that this is a discovery on par with any of the greatest discoveries in the history of the world, such as the original "discovery of the wheel." "

I imagine there might be a leap in logic that I am not smart enough to detect; if someone would look into these issues and give me their opinions I would appreciate it.

Don't get caught up in this hogwash. It's a game anyone can play. Oh, look! The sun rises in the East! Therefore... whatever. Yes, the sun rises in the east, but the conclusion does not necessarily follow. Just because someone includes something as true, doesn't mean they've made the "link" to show their desired conclusion. In this case, there is none. Is there somewhere in the Bible that talks about a "Bible wheel?" No, there isn't. It's all man-made.

Historically, the Bible has had 73 books since the canon of the Bible was decided in the fourth century by the Magisterium of the Church (Pope + bishops united to him). Martin Luther changed it in 1517 A.D., by adopting the Hebrew canon, which was decided AFTER the start of Christianity. The Church's Old Testament was the Septuagent version, of which about 80% of the references in the New Testament come from.

Here's a good video on the Origins of the Bible:

http://www.alabamacatholicresources.com/Bible.html

That should give you some historical truth to the matter.

God bless!

__________________
Scooby
http://www.alabamacatholicresources.com

The Bible is not some code to be deciphered.

2 Peter 1:20: "First of all you must understand this, that no prophecy of scripture is a matter of one’s own interpretation,"

2 Peter 3:15-16: "regard the patience of our Lord as salvation. So also our beloved brother Paul wrote to you according to the wisdom given to him, speaking of this as he does in all his letters. There are some things in them hard to understand, which the ignorant and unstable twist to their own destruction, as they do the other scriptures."

1 Peter 1:25: "the word of the Lord endures for ever. That word is the good news that was announced to you." [not some code a guy came up with 2000 years later]

Moreover there is no satisfactory explanation to why almost all of the quotations of the Old Testament in the New Testament are from the Septuagint (which contains the deutero books), for the reference to 2 Maccabees 7 in Hebrews 11:35, etc.

I'll bet, given enough free time (which I don't have, darn it) you could make up something similar "proving" the Bible was written by John Carter on Mars.

And they say us Catholics are odd. <smiles> Avoid spending any time on this... IMO.

- Michael

__________________
Check out my blog at: http:\\www.road2rome.org

You guys are missing my point - I either want one of you to waste your time or if there already exists a good critique - a link to that source of the critique.

I know it is man-made and goes against Scripture, but what I really am interested in learning if there are any obvious examples of errors in thinking that I should point out.

I used the example of the Septuagint and he finally admitted that the Holy Spirit used that version too, but you have to understand I am dealing with someone who at first tried to claim that the chapter and verse divisions were inspired as well - although he did back down somewhat from that claim - so I know it is a hard case.

The other obvious point I made was that NO reputable Protestant scholar or theologian has gotten behind this great discovery, to which he replied:

I think more people will begin to recognize the beauty in the Bible wheel and in God's word. Unfortunately, many scholars seem to have minds that are hermetically sealed against any such notions. For example, tell them of the divine integration of Gen 1:1 and John 1:1, and they shrug it off as "numerology". See here http://www.biblewheel.com/GR/GR_Show...Creation_John1 and here http://homepage.virgin.net/vernon.jenkins/Evidences.htm . There are more things in God's heaven and earth than are dreamt up in these scholar's philosophies.

An appeal to the arrogance and blindness of smart people which is not very convincing but that many Christian believe because the bible makes references like this.

Any other help would be appreciated.

In ancient days, mathematical, complex and convoluted formulae were used to describe the motion of heavenly bodies (specifically, planets). The formulae were actually quite convincing and useful but were based on an axiom known since before the Protestant Reformation to be false: Geocentrism.

The people who make these formulae probably were concerned for their jobs and started applying their talents to religion, recognizing their days in science were numbered.

Obviously, since these formulae assert the primacy of the Masoretic Text (MT) and disprove the Septuagint (LXX), they are flawed and in need of revision.

__________________
-John

Hi! I'm interested in the study of the Bible Wheel. I found this thread just now because today I suddenly felt a need to google "bible wheel", and - look what I find! - a fresh discussion on the web about the structure of Scripture.

Although at first impression it may seem complicated, the essence is very simple. The Bible Wheel is the relationship between the 66 books of the Catholic Protocanon (= Protestant Canon) and the symbolic meaning of the 22 letters of the Hebrew Alphabet. This meaning of the letters is found in the Bible itself in passages such as the acrostic Psalm 119 (118 in some Bibles).

To each Hebrew letter there are three books associated. So it goes:

Aleph: Genesis, Isaiah, Romans
Bet: Exodus, Jeremiah, 1 Corinthians
Guimel: Leviticus, Lamentations, 2 Corinthians
...
Shin: Ecclesiastes, John, Jude
Tav: Song of Songs, Acts, Revelation

Each three books are deeply integrated with the corresponding Hebrew letter. For example, God Himself says that meaning of Aleph (Alpha, in Greek) is "beginning", "first" (Revelation 22:13) and the three books corresponding to Aleph are the three great "firsts" in the Bible:

Genesis: the first book of the Law
Isaiah: the first book of the Prophets
Romans: the first of the Epistles

The best thing to do if you want to have an overview is to read the Introductory Article.

The Bible Wheel demonstrates how the traditional Bible book sequence has meaning. The structure of the Bible authenticates its content. The Bible Wheel thesis is additional evidence of the inner harmony of Scripture. It gives glory to God.

I'll offer comments about the posts above as I find time, starting with the OP.

In Christ,
Victor

Hey there Gilbert! It is nice to be talking.

Yes!, it is a good challenge. And, as you can see on this thread, it is hard to find someone who is willing to "look, with an open mind," at the subject. People are quick to dismiss it without actually interacting with the thesis. They reject it without really knowing it.

If a thesis is wrong, it does not help to merely say that it is wrong. Its error needs to be demonstrated. If no one is willing to show the error by facts and logic and reason, this is a hint that maybe the thesis is not in error.

When I first learned about the Wheel, I tried to find a systematic error in it. But, despite all my efforts, so far I have found none. The favorable evidence actually keeps piling up. And I haven't anyone who has gone there and actually "proved it wrong".

The Bible Wheel thesis does not claim that. It is a fundamental mistake in your aprehension of it. The Bible Wheel demonstrates that the 66 books are inspired, but does not 'exclude Catholic and Orthodox'. The thesis in no point argues that the books that are found outside the Catholic Protocanon should be rejected. It only demonstrates that the 66 books are inspired. It does not say anything about the other books.

See, all Catholics and Orthodox accept the 66 books. This book set UNITES all three major branches of Christendom - Catholics, Orthodox and Protestants. This is one point they all have in common despite so many differences. Therefore, the Bible Wheel is a factor of unity for all Christians. It helps ecumenism. No Catholic or Orthodox needs to renounce his faith to accept the validity of the Wheel.

This is another perception error. The Bible Wheel is actually very simple because the Bible is very simple.

But at the same time the Bible Wheel is very deep and complex because the Bible is very deep and complex.

This is the complex simplicity of God's Revelation. The Gospel message is as simple as it gets, but is also infinitely rich.

So if anyone wants to learn the Wheel, even if only to attempt to refute it, he must begin at the beginning. There is nothing "convoluted" in it. Just start with the Introduction.

The Bible Wheel website also harbors other studies, and some of them are "very mathematical", like studies on the old Jewish-Christian tradition of Gematria. But they are not the thesis of the Bible Wheel. They are separate things. The Bible Wheel does not use math. It occasionally uses number symbolism because the Bible uses number symbolism.

I'll cover the rest of your post when I get the chance.

Many blessings,
Victor

Apologize....... Missed your intention. I'll shut up now as I've not researched it.

- Michael

__________________
Check out my blog at: http:\\www.road2rome.org

Vanna, I'd like to SOLVE THE PUZZLE.

We have it on high authority that Jewish traditions can be either good:

Or bad:

So the sheer fact that this is a "Jewish tradition" from "one of the oldest Jewish religious texts in existence, the Sepher Yetzirah" does not make it authoritative in any way. As it turns out, the Sepher Yezirah is a Kabbalistic work that is from no earlier than the late 1st-early 2nd century AD. That's well after the Jewish rabbinical authorities crucified Jesus and right around the time that those same authorities rejected the New Testament as divinely inspired--in other words, this work has no authority to bind Christians, nor does anything based on it, like the Bible Wheel. Insofar as Protestants use it to void the authority of the deuterocanon, they are just doing the Corban thing.

So in 1995, someone came up with an "authoritative" biblical canon based on post-Calvary Jewish tradition. But we are under standing orders to "contend for the faith that was once for all entrusted to the saints." (Jude 1.3). We must reject any "different gospel from the one" that came from those saints. (2 Corinthians 11.4).

Those who are using the Bible Wheel in an attempt to depose the saints who decided the canon of the Bible (the Apostles and their successors) and substitute a different authority (post-Calvary rabbinical tradition with Clinton administration-era gloss) in their place are doing exactly what those saints warned us about.

The fact that the "Protestant canon" has 66 books and 22 letters in the Hebrew alphabet x 3 == 66 (which is really all that there is to this Bible Wheel thing) is cute but not meaningful. For that matter, 27 of those books--the New Testament--weren't even written in Hebrew.

As I explained above, you won't take much time to understand the basics. You can begin with the Introduction. Here it is:

Introduction to the Bible Wheel

I encourage you to keep an open mind. It is always a pleasure to learn from Scripture, an the study of the Bible Wheel vindicates Scripture.


Actually no one has ever written anything "debunking" the Bible Wheel, for they can not. People who do not accept it simply cannot demonstrate any fundamental flaw in the thematic correlation between the 22 letters and the 66 books. They just run away trying hard not to listen to the arguments, or get silent in face of evidence, or plainly ridicule it.

But one thing you won't find anywhere is a principled refutation of the thesis. Those who reject it simply cannot point to any systematic error in the Bible Wheel. You would be the first. But then first you would have to examine it with an open mind and understand what is going on. As Scripture says:



As it stands, no one as ever satisfactorily refuted the validity of the powerful and obvious correlation between the 22 letters and the 66 books.

Everything is explained on the Bible Wheel website. This Protestant person should have had simply pointed the site to you since it explains in detail "the hows and whys of the origins of the Bible Wheel". It is all clear as day. A person was once reflecting on the meaning of the 22 Hebrew letters -- highly esteemed by Jewish-Christian tradition and even Scripture itself -- and, in his effort to understand it, was naturally led to correlate the Letters to the Bible books. You know, even the Jews tried to fit their canon into the number of Hebrew letters.

And so, to his surprise, he noticed that the meaning of the first letters correlated with the distinctive themes of the first books.

For example, consider the relationship between the second letter, Bet, and the second book, Exodus. The second letter Bet means "House". And what is the the second book all about? Well, the largest and climactic section of Exodus deals with the detailed description of the design of the Tabernacle, the House of God. (Chapters 25-40) House is an essential keyword in Exodus and House is the meaning of the letter Bet.

Bet is also the initial letter of Ben, which means "Son". (See the acrostic Lamentations 4:2) And another distinctive theme in Exodus is that it is the first book where God calls anyone His "Son"! (Exodus 4:22) It is a fundamental theme in Exodus, as recognized by anyone with a good handle on Scripture.

In fact, Exodus has three sections: God calls His Son Israel out of Egypt (chapters 1-18), enters into a Covenant with them at the foot of Sinai (19-24) and then gives the plan of His House (25-40). These are the overarching themes of Exodus. And all of them are linked to Bet. "Son" begins with Bet (Ben). "Covenant" begins with Bet (Berit)! And "House" is the literal meaning of the letter Bet. (For a wider treatment of the subject check the article Bet - the House of God).

So there is an obvious and strong link between the great themes in Exodus and the meaning of the letter Bet.

But the great news is that this is not the only book correlated to the meaning of the corresponding Hebrew letter! The meaning of Aleph is linked to the distinctive themes of Genesis, the meaning of Guimel relates to the distinguishing themes of Leviticus, and so on and so forth. That is how the "Bible Wheel" was discovered. There was nothing imposed into it. It all came out naturally and organically.

The 66 books that unite all Christians are plainly associated with the meaning of the 22 Letters, a meaning explained by Scripture itself, as well as Jewish tradition. It demonstrates to the Jews how their cherished canon seamlessly integrates with the New Testament revelation.

I also tried hard to find a leap in logic when I met it - I am a very skeptic person, - but so far I have found none. No one has ever been able to point to a systematic error or fundamental flaw in this study. The Bible Wheel is a beautiful and powerful icon of the Faith. It enshrines the structure of the Bible books by displaying their self-integrated nature.

It is a pleasure to discuss God's Word with you. May He bless us all.

Victor

I just did. And here is another.

Remember that the problem is that the Bible Wheel is being asserted by some (maybe not you, I do not know your heart) as proof of the Protestant canon. That is a direct attack against the Catholic Church. That is why it must be debunked, not because it isn't beautiful and not because it has no worth.

The Wheel is also dependent on chapter numbers. Those were not part of the inspired original text. They were added by Stephen Cardinal Langton in 1200 AD. They are a product of the Catholic Church.

its pretty simple. The new testament was written mostly in greek. Therefore the rules of hebrew symbolism don't apply to those texts. Since the underlying hypothesis fails, the conclusion is faulty.

__________________
" Friends don't let friends drive themselves to Hell. "


addeternal.blogspot.com

Hi there Cat Herder! To be fair I try to follow the posting sequence when I reply. But I'll make a quick comment on your last post and then try to go back to the sequence.

I'm sorry but you did not. You have not even learned the alleged relationship between the books and the letters, so you cannot say that you have refuted it.

You just revealed that you are not familiar with the Bible Wheel. You are trying to refute something that you have not aprehended yet. Please slow it down. It is better to follow the principle of Proverbs 18:13.

It is wiser to first (1) turn off the "rebuttal mode" and (2) spend some time trying to understand what it is. Then you will be able to (3) ask clarifying questions and (4) only then you will be in a position to start "debunking" it. Begin with the Introduction.

I'll eventually get to your first post and reply to it in more detail.

That text is a childish and moronic article that uses all sorts of logical fallacies. It has been thoroughly debunked, line by line, and the author of the "rebuttal" cowardly ran away after that. He was trying to refute something that he did not understand.

People can assert anything they want about the Wheel. We cannot control what they say.

You can read the entire Bible Wheel book for free. You won't find a single attack on the Catholic Church in it. In fact, you will find references to people who the Catholic Church deems as doctors, saints and popes.

As I have been explaining on this thread, the Protestant Canon is the same as the Catholic Protocanon. The Bible Wheel demonstrates the self-integration of the Catholic Protocanon. It doesn't "attack" the other books that are part of the Catholic Canon.

Once again you show that you are trying to respond to something that you are ignorant of. You should not rush. Take your time before trying to find a flaw in the Wheel.

The Bible Wheel is not "dependent on chapter numbers". The Bible Wheel book has 400+ pages but it doesn't have anything related to "chapter numbers". This "chapter number" stuff is yet another study on the Bible Wheel website. The Wheel is exactly the same if you remove all the chapter divisions in the Bible.

In Christ the Word of God,
Victor

Hello brother,

Unfortunately you have not examined the Wheel, so you cannot say that 'there isn't anything in the Bible that talks about a Bible wheel'. There is nothing completely explicit, but everything in the Bible points in that direction. There is not only the literal meaning, remember? Not everything in the Bible is explicit. This is one more case. We just need to examine it.

In vehemens, veritas.
I don't have to apprehend you or the Bible Wheel. (If you want to be apprehended, you'll need the police for that.) *Your proposition is that the Bible Wheel is of divine origin yet you admit it was discovered in 1995.*

Joseph Smith claims the Book of Mormon was revealed in 1828, that it is consistent with the Bible, and that it is beautiful--therefore it is from God. These are the same assertions you are making about the Bible Wheel. Does that mean that the LDS Church is true?

No, because these modern revelations are not consistent with the fact that the faith was once for all handed to the saints in 33-120 AD, the former being Calvary and the latter being when the last Apostle died. It doesn't matter how beautiful the Wheel is, it is of human origin because God no longer engages in public revelation and the Bible says so. The end.

As I said, the Bible Wheel is interesting and cute. *But it is a human tradition and not something that you should feel any need to defend with such passion.*

Cat Herder,

That's exactly correct.

The Bible is not a "code", it is the Word of God. As such, it is full of wisdom. For millenia God's servants have been drawing insights from Scripture.

If a "guy" at some point in Christian history (like an Early Church Father, a 15th century scholar or a layman in the 19th century) notices from his comparison of Bible passages that, say, the transition from Elijah to Elisha is a typological image of the transition from John to Jesus, he is not deciphering any code. He is just noticing something that has already been sitting there in Scripture just was waiting to be perceived. There has been countless insights such as that coherently building up one upon another in the last 2,000 years.

The Bible Wheel is one more of such insights into Scripture. It shows how the meaning of the Hebrew letters as it appears in the Bible correlates with the themes of the Bible books. You have yet to assess the evidence that demonstrates it.

This is an outside subject. The validity of the Wheel doesn't depend on that, since the Wheel is the thematic correlation between the 22 letters and the 66 books. The fact that NT authors often quoted from the LXX is a separate subject that doesn't impact on the issue at hand.

But God's servants, including the Apostles, were using the LXX, ergo the Catholic canon the entire time. For someone in 1995 to "discover" that there is this Bible Wheel and the deutero books don't fit on it isn't an insight, but a revolution that overturns the Bible itself.

Again, you may or may not be arguing the Bible Wheel against Catholicism. But, again, in vehemens, veritas, as I will explain.

I don't have to look at your evidence because it fails my motion to dismiss for lack of consistency with the Bible itself.


What is the "validity" of the Wheel? What are you asserting that it is? A game to help people learn about Scripture or a revelation from God? If the former, why are you so angry when people politely point out that it is of human origin?

If you are asserting the latter it most certainly does.

Hi Victor,

Thanks for your responses, I went ahead and cut and pasted the intro (18 pages) that you suggested and will trudge through - since no one else is going to

I do believe that the NT text being in Greek does make the premise quite shaky, when it comes to the correlations found from the OT to the NT; also I think in whatever order I were to arbitrarily arrange the books of the bible, I bet I would be able to find correlations - some strong, some weak - going back and forth between either Greek text and/or Hebrew text, the bible is quite repetitive (as it should be we humans need repetition).

I do not think it is a separate issue that Jesus, the apostles, and evangelists quoted primarily from the Septuagint (70% from what I have read) and should be dealt with by the author.

But one of the arguments I would like to see addressed is why there is a complete silence from other Protestant theologians and scholars. Are there any Protestants, other than those affiliated with the Bible Wheel, who proclaim this amazing discovery? If it could be thoroughly studied, affirmed, and proclaimed by the Protestant communities Mass attendance might drop even further.

Victor

The is a fundamental problem with this statement. You have fallen into a very common fallacy. The Bible Wheel, regardless of its logic, reason, and math, absolutely cannot, does not, and never will demonstrate that the 66 books are inspired simply because at the very most it is just a correlation. A correlation between two things, in and of itself, does not indicate an association between the two things. So what is the difference between a Corrrelation and an Association? Consider the following example, every year the rate of prostitution in New York City strongly correlates with the importation of bananas into that city. As the rate of banana importation increases the rate of prostitution increases. Now don't let your mind go nasty, they simply correlate but they are not in any way associated with each other, rather they are both associated with the season of the year, ie. they both increase in summer and descrease in winter. That is why when the full Catholic Cannon is considered the Bible Wheel model simply falls apart. To better understand the limits of data and models I would suggest that you read the book "Black Swan" by Nassim Nicholas Taleb.

The only reason the books of the bible are considered inspired is because of the authority of the Holy Catholic Church that was given to it directly by Jesus Christ. Catholic bishops in the centuries after Christ, guilded by the Holy Spirit, examined all of the documents available to them and judged some of them as inspired and most of them as not inspired. The only criterias for being inspired were: Is the document associated with an apostle and does the content of the document match the existing dogman of the Holy Catholic Church? The bishops absolutely did not consider any type of mathematical models!

Ran

I tend not to delve into numerology that much, or astrology for that matter. This is an extreme version of faith without reason.

__________________
"In the end, there can only be one"-The Highlander

Let us be one as You are One with the Father, and Holy Spirit! Amen.

One interesting correlation that I did find was to a patent file in 1898 for a board game called Bible Wheel:

http://www.google.com/patents?hl=en&...page&q&f=false

I won't draw any conclusion other than his overall name decision and putting the books of the bible on a wheel using spokes is not an innovation - maybe coincidence!

It is pretty normal for people to 'recognize' stuff they know from their own knowledge base. Just google "ancient Egyptian light bulb" to see what I mean.

__________________
Protons have mass? I didn't even know they were Catholic!

There are over 30 references to "I", "my", or "me" in the red text. Maybe he has an "I" problem.

__________________
Difficult and discomforting truths from Calvin and Luther

Saying the Protestant Canon is correct, is like me saying my own person canon is correct.

Did Jesus say, "Upon this 'bible wheel' I build my Church?"

NO!!!!

Jesus said; "And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the powers of death shall not prevail against it." (MT 16:18)

Sancta Maria, Mater Dei, Ora Pro Nobis Pecatoribus!

mark

__________________
"EGO SUM PANIS VITAE" "ἐγώ εἰμι ὁ ἄρτος τῆς ζωῆς"
"I AM THE BREAD OF LIFE"
(JOHN 6:35 & 48)



"For man has in his heart a law inscribed by God. . . . His conscience is man's most secret core and his sanctuary. There he is alone with God whose voice echoes in his depths." (CCC 1776).

Bible wheel...Bible code...Bible math, science, chemistry, etc etc etc.

I looked it over and as someone earlier pointed out, the Jews did not have the New Testament, so this system is flawed from the outset, so far as Christians are concerned.

Moreover, it harks to numerology, which isn't a science.

Then of course we get into the point of who actually has the authority to decide what is inspired canon, and the Jews didn't, even at their "council of Javnia".

There is more than ample evidence that the Septuagint was the translation that the New Testament quotes most. Over 90% come from the Septuagint and here is the long list of times where Our Lord and the apostles quote the Septuagint as recorded in the New Testament.

The 66 book canon is wrong on many many levels and is not the one that the early church affirmed and canonized. It is an abridged edition of the Word of God made by men.

__________________

I've been accused of being too plain and too simple in my comments - be that as it may.

Non- catholic versions of the Holy Bible are still the word of God, they're just incomplete.

66 books as opposed to the complete (Catholic Bible) 73.

So, when someone comes to me saying that the protestant bible is this, that or the other thing and rejecting the Catholic Bible for those reasons - my answer is the same: "your version is incomplete".

And in this case you mention, they can add all 4 wheels, a horse, carriage and multi CD player and it is still an incomplete (and sometimes innacurate) version of the Catholic Bible.

There is also an implication here that the ORDER of the books in the one-volume Bible that is familiar to us is, itself, inspired. Which completely disregards the facts that 1) for most of the history of the written Word, it could not be contained in a single volume and 2) the order of books has varied over the years both in listings by authorities and in the actual compilations in books - Acts, for example, used to be the second-to-last book in the NT. In fact, I have been told that to this day German Protestant Bibles have the NT epistles in a different order. So any numerology-inspired effort to "prove" the inspiration of the 66-book-canon-in-its-present-order-in-Protestant-English-Bibles has some 'splainin' to do.

__________________
"Strive for peace with all men, and for the holiness without which no one will see the Lord." Heb. 12:14

Crossed the Tiber 1980 (no, I can't swim)

Protestant Canon of Scripture?

You do know that Martin Luther also wanted to throw out James, Jude, Hebrews, Revelations. Not to mention 7 books of the old testament.

The Canon of Scripture was laid down 393 AD by the Catholic Church and St Jerome used the available texts at the time to translate them into Latin, into what we now call the "Vulgate"

You'll hear some protestants try to tell you that the Catholic Church added 7 books to the Bible to try to prove the existence of purgatory or some other rubbish. The fact is that the Bible is a product of the Church. Christianity is not a faith of a book, it is the faith taught and handed on through apostolic succession - the Bible is only a part of what Christianity is all about.

Hello back,

I would like to follow the posting sequence for the sake of organization. If I take a while to reply, it is not because I don't want to address a specific point, but because I'm only one and have limited time.

I want to answer ALL THE QUESTIONS. For each and every one of them there is a clear and comprehensive response. Only darkness fears authentic examination.

Of course I'm human and may fail to respond to some specific point, or may answer only in part and thus not satisfactorily, but I'll try to do my best.

This is a misunderstanding. The Bible Wheel study does not use any Jewish work as "authoritative". You are replying to something that was not stated. The account of the discovery of the Bible Wheel in the OP just shows that how the Sepher Yetzirah served as a heuristic that helped to systematize the correlation between the letters and the books in circular form. But the Bible Wheel derives from the Bible only. You compare the distinctive themes of each book to the meaning of the letters of the alphabet (found in the Bible itself) and notice that the Bible book themes follow the same "thematic order" of the alphabet. The Gospel story is told from the beginning (Aleph - Genesis) to end (Tav - Revelation).

There is nothing "authoritative" in the Bible Wheel like you put it. The Wheel simply displays the internal alphabetic harmony of Scripture. It shows the impressive thematic correlation between the Hebrew letters and the Protocanon. It is not an "authoritative Bible canon". It is just an exposition of verifiable facts.

Once again you show that you are trying to refute something that you don't know. The fact that the number of books is a multiple of the number of letters in itself would not be much more than a happy coincidence.

The real amazing FACT is that the themes of the books of the Catholic Protocanon follow the meaning of the letters of the Alphabet. It is a perfect fit. And from a naturalistic viewpoint this is completely unexpected.

Thus the great themes of Genesis are related to the meaning of Aleph (beginnings, creation, birth, patriarchs (av), Adam, Abraham), the distinguishing themes of Exodus are related to the meaning of Bet (sonship, covenant, God's House), and so on and so forth all the way up to Revelation and Tav (consummation, completion, resurrection (t'chiyah), praise (tehillah)).

It is an astonishing journey - it infuses into us a deep love for the Creator and lets us see salvation history in a glance, from A to Z, so to speak. It is absolutely staggering. It gives glory to the Almighty God. It is additionally yet another line of evidence to the truth of Christianity.

This clearly shows a rush to refute without knowing what you are trying to refute. (Proverbs 18:13)

The correlation between the meaning of the letters and the books of the Bible does not depend on the language in which the NT was written. The correlation takes place between concepts (themes, motifs, symbols). Concepts can be expressed in any language.

Each Hebrew letter has a meaning, and Scripture teaches these meanings for us, in the acrostic passages. The meaning of the Hebrew letters can be expressed in any language. So the second letter Bet has a meaning and in English for example it is called "house", just like in Greek it is called oikon.

So the connections takes place between the concept of "house" and the corresponding Bible book. Therefore the correlation can be verified in any language. It does not relate to the NT being written in Greek. It could have been written in, say, Aramaic, or Latin, and the conceptual link would still exist.

But this would be much clearer to you if you had first examined what you were trying to refute. I encourage you to first get familiar with the subject. Then you will be able to begin to address the issue.

Hello traillius,

Please see my post above in which I address this point.

I gave the example of Bet. Bet means House. The word "house" can be expressed in any language, including the Greek in which the NT was written.

Thus if we correlate Genesis to Aleph, Exodus to Bet, Leviticus to Guimel, and so on, which is the NT Book where Bet will "fall"? First Corinthians. And is there any link between "House" and the distinctive themes of 1 Corinthians? Yes! This epistle is the first NT book to explicitly describe the Church as the House of God! (Cf. Chapter 3) Just like Exodus first introduces in detail the "House (Bet) of God", 1 Corinthians develops this theme typologically by showing that the Church is the ultimate place of God's indwelling.

This is a distinctive 1 Corinthians theme, and it is not the only one. There is a lot more that connects Bet to 1 Corinthians.

And the pattern goes on throughout all 27 NT Books, as you can check on the Bible Wheel website and the Bible Wheel book.

Causa finita est.

I don't really see anything astonishing in the Bible Wheel. All I see is an simple coincidence, just a plain correlation. It does not matter how much you add to the model or how mathematically perfect it becomes, the Bible Wheel will never be more than a simple coincidence! It adds absolutely nothing to God's truth (only God can do that) and absolutely does not represent any type of evidence for God's truth.

Catholics believe in the truth of Christianity only because of the authority given by Jesus Christ to the Holy Catholic Church to be the pillar and bulwark of His truth. True faith in God has nothing to do with models, numbers, etc. True faith is founded in a love of God, an acceptance of His salvation, and a desire to serve Him.

Time spend contemplate the Bible Wheel could be better spent in prayer to God and server one's fellow man.

Hi there, Perhaps "the wheel" could be a means to get agostics, atheists, occultists and others interested in the study of holy scripture with the possibility of their conversion to the Church....... but

Pslm 37:Aleph to Taw i.e. The Fate of Sinners and the Reward of the Just - is far more important and relevant to me as a Roman Catholic.

__________________

Hi Gilbert!

I applaud you atittude. You are applying the inspired proverb in your life. You see, people start throwing opinions without even examining the issue. No one is forced to examine the issue but if one wants to say that "it is wrong" he should be prepared to support this statement with evidence, and that in turn requires being familiar with the subject.

For me the intro takes about 10 pages. I think it is just the format...

I know, I know, it would be much better if you could find an independent analysis somewhere, specially from a Catholic POV, but there's no such thing so far. Folks either just ignore or say "it is flawed" and move along. For me it was the same as you, I didn't have some review that I could see first to help me form my opinion. I had to do it myself. But it was worth all the effort.

Chapter 1 gives an overview and shows what the Bible Wheel is all about. Once this is introduced, one can begin to explore the correlation between the Hebrew alphabet and the Protocanon.

For example, one of the striking top-level features is the large-scale pattern of the Canon Wheel. When you plot on the Wheel the canonical groups of the Bible (Torah, OT History, Wisdom literature, etc.), you find the traditonal picture of the tri-radiant cruciform halo that suffuses Christian iconography. The Canon Wheel is an icon that illustrates the isomorphism between the Incarnate Word and the Inspired Word. It artistically portrays the central message of the Bible: the Sign of the Cross as the ultimate manifestation in history of the love of the Blessed Trinity for us.





Or you can explore the correlation between the meaning of a Hebrew letter and its connection to the three books associated with it. The first and the last letters - Aleph and Tav - are specially representative for overview purposes. God says that He is "the First and the Last" only in books that fall on Aleph and Tav!

Another striking correlation is the one that takes place between the first three letters, the first three books and the Three Persons of the Blessed Trinity.



That's just first impression misunderstanding. Please see posts #31and 32 where I address this issue.

You are exactly right. The Bible is deeply self-integrated; thus any set of n books arbitrarily chosen out the Bible book collection will present correlations amongst themselves. And that shouldn't surprise us -- Scripture is one book!

So why would the correlations found in Bible Wheel be any different? Because there is an independent parameter to guide the connections, which the Hebrew alphabet, proclaimed in the Bible itself. The associations are not random - one compares the book to the corresponding Hebrew letter. For example, Proverbs and Luke are both governed by the 20th letter Resh. There are many commonalities between these two books, just like any other two given Bible books, but the amazing "coincidence" is that the common themes between Proverbs and Luke are associated with the meaning of Resh! (cf. Lady Wisdom, health, wealth, friendship, etc., etc.).

I'll address these two points next, as I find time. Time to go now.

Many blessings,
Victor

I cant believe the **** people come up with.

So where can I order one of these so I can use it as a steering wheel or dart board?

Hi Victor,

Here is my assessment of the Bible Wheel from the introduction and the problems I have with it, as well as some additional questions.

ORIGINS
Sepher Yetzirah
At the very beginning of the introduction the author (Richard Amiel McGough) makes the following statement: “This exemplifies how everything in the Bible Wheel is derived from Scripture and Scripture alone.”

However, I think his inspiration for using the 22 Hebrew letters in a circle was derived from his reading of the Sepher Yetzirah, while studying Hebrew at an earlier date:

Twenty-two Foundation letters: He engraved them, He carved them, He permuted them, He weighed them, He transformed them, and with them He depicted all that was formed and all that would be formed.

Twenty-two Foundation letters: He placed them in a circle like a wall with 231 gates. The Circle oscillates back and forth. A sign for this is: There is nothing in good higher than Delight (Oneg – ); There is nothing in evil lower than Plague (Nega – )
Sepher Yetzirah 2.2

The Sepher Yetzirah, or Book of Creation, is one of the oldest Jewish religious texts to be found outside the Bible. (Source - http://www.biblewheel.com/wheel/ancientwitness.asp)

So right off the bat we note that not everything is derived from Scripture and Scripture alone, as he claims in statement!

Board Game
Also, I previously mentioned that I found an old patent, for a late 19th century board game, which curiously had a similar name and design to Mr. McGough’s Bible Wheel (here is the link again). - http://www.google.com/patents?hl=en&...page&q&f=false)

I suppose the game name and design could just be a superficial coincidence, but I can also see plausible grounds for drawing the conclusion (whether true or false) that the author borrowed his design and name.

Alphabetic Verses & Keywords
The fact that there are alphabetic verses (such as Psalm 119) in the bible, it does not necessarily follow that anything other than a literary device was used by the Holy Spirit when He inspired the authors of Scripture. The use of literary devices for oral teaching among the Jews (and even early Christians) to aid in memorization has been well documented.

Please also if you could let me know the meaning (and significance) of KeyWords the first mention in the introduction states the following: “These KeyWords are essential to everything that follows in this book. They are built-in keys designed by God to unlock the supernatural structure…”

Unfortunately, he never fully explains the significance of them (maybe he does so later on in the book) and he finishes out the section with such a strong statement about them I would like clarification: “Moreover, God embedded within this foundation an abundant storehouse of Alphabetic KeyWords that prophetically anticipate the thematic pattern of the entire Bible from Genesis to Revelation…”

The Hebrew Alphabet
Here, I think, is the major problem (outside of the fact that the NT was written in Greek & Septuagint issues) with his method and maybe you can clarify it for me. The author states and I have no reason to disbelieve his conclusion: “The Hebrew Alphabet is an incomparably rich and self-coherent symbolic system. Each Letter has a broad set of associated meanings based on its name, its position in the Alphabet, its role in Hebrew grammar, and its use in the Alphabetic Verses. The great miracle of God is that the meanings associated with each Letter, which have been well understood for millennia, are also fully integrated with the content of the Books on the corresponding Spokes of the Wheel.”

We see that the Hebrew lettering has a broad set of associated meanings based on a number of factors. Broad applications are not very convincing to me which could be a possible explanation why there are so many associated meanings or correlations. What would have been more convincing would be correlations that were very specific which just so happened to be in the aligned spokes.

Conclusion
I did approach this with a relatively open mind and possibly some of your answers to my objections might make me change my mind, but in my opinion the fact that the Christian canon was written in Greek and the fact that the favored OT of the NT authors, and the Lord, was the Septuagint version makes it unconvincing to me in principle.

Add in the fact of the broad associated meanings, contained in Hebrew language and the overall ambiguousness of the claims of correlations (I did think the best correlation was the alignment of Genesis, Isaiah & Romans), and I am left with the impression this was more of a business venture than a deep theological treatise.

Best regards,

v1gilbert

Victor,

As others have said, there are numerous different orders of Scripture. How is one to truly know whether the correct order? The Old Testament has a few orders depending on the tradition. The epistles of St Paul are arbitrarily ordered from longest to shortest. There are book divisions that did not exist in the original texts (1&2 Samuel, Ezra-Nehemiah).

Any book of the Bible can be examined for any theme. Philemon, for example, can be corresponded to Bet-Ben-Son because of how Paul refers to Onesimus in verse 10.

If we were to take seriously the order assuming this formula, it would require a few things of the Divine Author:

• He would have had to divinely protect the order of books in all legitimate traditions and languages.
• He would have had to number them acrostically, specifically in the Order He wanted them.
• The New Testament acrostic continuation would have had to continue in a language that has the same number of letters and with the same letter-meanings (perhaps Aramaic - Greek has more than 22 letters so it is plainly incompatible). Several NT books (esp. Pauline letters) were likely written directly in Greek.
• The New Testament would have to continue to exist as Aramaic originals for verification of proper order and interpretation (several books are not known to exist historically in Aramaic and were translated from Greek hundreds of years later)

__________________
-John

Stick to the Bible that was given to us by the Saints, and avoid any bibles, wheels, golden tablets or other stuff that is given by heretics and/or unbelievers.

__________________
According to Quentin Tarentino, (Kill Bill Volume 2) Clark Kent is Superman's opinion of the human race. It occurs to me that, using the same logic, Jesus of Nazareth is God's.

Tiber Swim Team - Class of 2001

I haven't heard of it before but it reminds me of that book a few years ago that became a sensation. I don't remember the name of it but it had to do with bible codes.

Now that we have that settled, whose interpretation shall we use?

__________________
Difficult and discomforting truths from Calvin and Luther

SonCatcher is right on about Samuel and Ezra-Nehemiah. The latter breaks the Bible Wheel because Ezra-Nehemiah were one text in ALL Hebrew Bibles produced before Jerome separated them in the Latin Vulgate.

Wait. Jerome? Latin? Vulgate?

The Vulgate is the Bible of the Catholic Church.

It is only because of the Catholic Church that there are 66 books in the Protestant Bible, not 65.

No Catholic Church, NO BIBLE WHEEL.

Causa finita est. (Denique.)

Actually, by my counting, there are 39 books in the Protestant Old Testament. Where are people getting 22 from?

__________________
According to Quentin Tarentino, (Kill Bill Volume 2) Clark Kent is Superman's opinion of the human race. It occurs to me that, using the same logic, Jesus of Nazareth is God's.

Tiber Swim Team - Class of 2001

Because I goofed. Fixed.

There are 22 letters in the Hebrew Alphabet, so the Bible Wheel folks say take 22 x 3 == 66 and that's how many books there should be in the Bible (not just the OT).

But Ezra-Nehemiah drops that down to 65, breaking the Bible Wheel.

Well, so would the three scrolls of Isaiah, if modern scholars are correct that they were originally intended to be three different books.



And the only reason the six books from ! Samuel to II Chronicles are six books instead of just one, is because of the length - they didn't have scrolls that long, so they used six scrolls - thus, we end up with six books.

__________________
According to Quentin Tarentino, (Kill Bill Volume 2) Clark Kent is Superman's opinion of the human race. It occurs to me that, using the same logic, Jesus of Nazareth is God's.

Tiber Swim Team - Class of 2001

So to wrap it up...

1. The Bible Wheel folks say there are 66 books (22 Hebrew letters x 3) in the Bible

2. Some Protestants are using the Bible Wheel "canon" as an argument against the Septuagint OT+NT canon (the 73 book Catholic Bible), and thus, against the authority of the Catholic Church

3. BUT there are actually 65 books in the "Protestant" Bible because Ezra-Nehemiah was one book...

4. ... Until Jerome separated them in the Latin Vulgate

5. The Latin Vulgate is a CATHOLIC BIBLE

6. Thus the Protestants in (2) are in a Catch-22:
a. If Jerome was right to divide Ezra-Nehemiah, then the Wheel works... but then the Catholic Church must have had the authority to determine the canon so as to divide Ezra-Nehemiah, so the Wheel fails.
b. If Jerome was wrong, then there aren't enough books for the Bible Wheel to be complete, and it fails.

7. ERGO: The Bible Wheel fails to define the canon and the Protestants making argument (2) are refuted.

And this is not even getting into how you divide Samuel, or what jmcrae brought up.

Amen and Amen

Hello all,

I'm sorry to say that I have been busy this weekend, and so I won't be able to post much of anything during this time. I'll likely be back on Monday, Deo volente. I want to say that I am much pleased with the quality of the posts.

The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ be with us all. Amen!

You're tilting at windmills. Better to inquire of the Holy spirit on a better way to spend your time. Don't get distracted by silly heresies. Save your time efforts for the serious ones.

__________________
Pray without ceasing. In all things give thanks; for this is the will of God in Christ Jesus concerning you all. 1 Thess 5:16-18

Tiber Swim Team 2009! (H.L.S.)

I am disappointed that no-one has yet proposed the most obvious idea:

We need to ADD 15 more books to the Catholic bible to make it be 88 books; then the “Bible Wheel” could be that much better by having 4 books per Hebrew letter.

My vote is for the book of “Enoch” and “The Assumption of Moses” since they’re both mentioned in the NT already anyway. And aren’t there a few extra Maccabes the Catholics didn’t add? What’s wrong with those?

Never mind the fact that the current Biblical cannon has been considered the complete word of God for well over 2000 years (if considering the old testament).

Victor, you talk so much about people refuting without researching, I have to ask two things:
Have you ever read the “extra” Catholic books?
Have you applied unbiased research methods in researching Bible origins?

Sorry if I offended you with my callous sarcasm, sometimes I juuust can’t resist.

Thank you for being so courteous in your response throughout this thread. You enthusiasm is laudable if misguided.

Good job all you guys nipping this one in the bud.

__________________
Crux sacra sit mihi lux! Nunquam draco sit mihi dux!
(May the holy cross be my light! May the dragon never be my guide!)

Hello back,

I continue to reply according to the time of the postings.

Gilbert, you raised several good questions. But there is yet a couple from your previous post that I still did not respond to. I pick it up from there and then later will go on to the others.

This is a very relevant fact -- the NT quotes primarily from the LXX and not the Hebrew text. But it seems to me that for some reason you think this subject is "shunned" by the author when in fact it is not; it is the other way around. In fact, in several debates he has shown how enthusiastic he is about the Septuagint text. The many connections between the OT and NT are more deeply understood when we notice the nuances of the Greek text of the OT. And I love the Septuagint myself.

I understand your care about this point. The NT usage of the LXX is important in the canon formation debate. But the thematic correlation between the 22 letters and the corresponding books is demonstrated regardless of this fact, since it is a thematic correlation. Plus, the depth of the Bible Wheel alphabetic links is even more striking when we take into consideration the Septuagint, and not the contrary.

For example, consider the first letter, Aleph. What are the three books that fall on Aleph on the Bible Wheel? Genesis, Isaiah and Romans. Do they have anything to do with Aleph?

Well, what does Aleph symbolize? According to God Himself, it represents "beginning", first things. (Revelation 22:13) And we know that the Bible story begins with creation. "In the beginning God created".

What is the Greek word for "create"? Ktidzo. Search this word in the LXX and the NT. What are the top three books with the greatest number of references to ktidzo? Genesis, Isaiah and Romans! These three books have everything to do with creation!

I could go on with other examples. Although the LXX is not necessary to estabilish the correlation between books and letters since it is thematic (and thus can be expressed in any language, like English or Latin), the LXX enhances and deepens the existing links.

Well, first it should be said that this study is pretty recent. The proclamation is only in its embrionary stages. It has been published on the Web for a few years, but no one is going out to 'visit theologians and scholars' to introduce the Bible Wheel yet.

This in part explains the "silence". But there is more involved. I remember when I first found this study on the Web. I was very skeptical and had to have some time for investigation, digestion and reflection before I could accept it. I kept looking for logical flaws, but the more I searched for weaknesses, the more favorable evidence appeared. Just like the Church, the more it is attacked, the more it shines. It seemed too good to be true, yet it was true (like the Bible itself!).

So it needs time. Although the Wheel is in perfect alignment with the Bible message, in a sense it is new stuff. (Matthew 13:52) Many scholars will not want to be the first to publicly endorse it. There will be a period of silence and of ignoring the evidence, maybe a long one. Then a period of ridicularization will likely follow. Only then will the real issues start being addressed. And probably there will never be a time when it will be widely accepted by scholars (just like the inspiration of the Bible itself is not accepted by most of them).

Your objection also has an implicit problem - it suggests that truth is determined by polls. Most "Bible scholars" deny that Scripture is inspired, but this doesn't change the fact that Scripture is inspired. There was a time when academics didn't think earth orbited around the sun and one could ask the same question you did. In other words, your reasoning is just a logical fallacy - an argumentum ad populum. The Bible Wheel being valid or not doesn't depend on acceptance by the scholarly community. We should use our God-given minds to assess the evidence.

Really? Since when? Did I miss something?

Hi Victor,
Are you saying that the title of this thread;

The Bible Wheel proves the Protestant Canon is correct!

is highly questionable and should never have been used if the intention of the post was sincere , because as you say, that is not what the Wheel intends to prove.

My two cents:

I think there are some good arguments on both sides here. I think the Bible wheel is interesting enough, I guess, but it's not something I have time for, myself. I think this sort of thing can be very distracting, misleading, and unproductive. I don't blame the guy who came up with it too much. I would probably get pretty excited if I thought I had unlocked some "secret" myself. But, I just can't buy it. So many things can seem to fit if you want them to badly enough. I think the wheel may begin to show a pattern of sorts, but then some of it is really grasping at straws (like the part about Bet correlating to 1 Corinthians being proven by the Corinthian reference to the "House of God"). I think the wheel is either silly, or evil. I'm too busy trying to learn and live by the Word of God to wonder about patterns in the structure of the book itself. The order of the books is just not as important as the content.

If some Protestants want to focus on numerology like this, let them wonder why the Gospel of John tells of Jesus's followers turning away and leaving Him (because they would not accept His teaching about the Eucharist) is 6:66.

Exactly correct!

This is I have been saying all along. This is a Catholic board and the thread title is too loaded, and thus misleading. But it should be said that I'm not the author of the OP. And the real author was only alluding to an opinion of a folk who stated that so that he could arouse the interest and get a discussion going on about the subject. Gilbert is not to blame.

The Bible Wheel demonstrates that the Catholic Protocanon is alphabetically self-integrated. At no point this study states that the seven extra books are not part of the canon. In fact, Richard McGough has stated several times that there can be a metapattern that integrates the seven books to the Wheel that he doesn't know about as of yet.

As it stands, the title of this thread only creates animosity and predisposes negatively the average reader of the board against the examination of the Bible Wheel, when the Wheel in and of itself is in no way a threat to the Catholic faith. That's likely why there are several one-liners on this thread criticizing it without even knowing what it is all about. As the thread receives more and more posts, the more it gets to the top and the more misunderstandings it raises. Mabye it would be better if it were called something such as "The Bible Wheel - an integration between the Hebrew Alphabet and the Catholic Protocanon".

I'm trying to approach the issue from an ecumenical perspective. The 66 books are something that essentially all Christians have in common. It thus contributes to ecumenical dialogue and helps to unite us.

I'll be back to the regular schedule.

Hi Victor,

While I await your response to my objections on post #39 (there is significance in that post number - there are only 39 OT books in the Protestant revised canon) I would like to address two quick issues:

1) What is the Catholic proto-Canon? I have seen this term used by you, but have no idea of its meaning.

2) You claim a logical fallacy in my reasoning here:

My statement "But one of the arguments I would like to see addressed is why there is a complete silence from other Protestant theologians and scholars. Are there any Protestants, other than those affiliated with the Bible Wheel, who proclaim this amazing discovery? If it could be thoroughly studied, affirmed, and proclaimed by the Protestant communities Mass attendance might drop even further."

Your statement "Your objection also has an implicit problem - it suggests that truth is determined by polls. Most "Bible scholars" deny that Scripture is inspired, but this doesn't change the fact that Scripture is inspired. There was a time when academics didn't think earth orbited around the sun and one could ask the same question you did. In other words, your reasoning is just a logical fallacy - an argumentum ad populum. The Bible Wheel being valid or not doesn't depend on acceptance by the scholarly community. We should use our God-given minds to assess the evidence."

The only way for a logical fallacy to occur would be if I had posited an argument, gave reasons to support my premise, and then drew a conclusion that I claimed to be true. I did no such thing in my statement.

It is common-sense to ask other people's opinions regarding topics we have no familiarity with, but not to draw a conclusion from their opinion.

So I await your response to my objections in post #39 and what in the world is meant by Catholic proto-Canon.

I only assert that the distinctive themes of the books track with the meanings of the letters of the Hebrew alphabet.

Joseph Smith has much different claims. He says that his "Book of Mormon" is inspired and supplements the public Revelation that ended when the last NT Book was penned.

The Bible Wheel is only a wide insight on public Revelation, not something added to that Revelation, as the Book of Mormon. No one needs to accept it as Smith claims about his "revelation".

Deep and profound insights from Scripture have been presented from the early Church Fathers to modern-day theologians. None of these insights intend to be an addition to public Revelation. They are meditations from Scripture that deepen our understanding and appreciation of God's public Revelation, which ended long ago.

If a scholar publishes a book, say, on textual parallels between Deutero-Isaiah and the Gospel of John, the only way to demonstrate that it is flawed is to engage with his work and point the inconsistencies (if there are any). Saying that he is "adding to Scripture" like the Mormons do is to misunderstand his intention.

I understand how you feel. But the alphabetic integration between the books and the Hebrew letters is not meant to be a revolution that intends to 'overturn the Bible'. Presenting a whole robust insight that involves a subset of Bible books -- even Catholics do that all the time -- does not mean that the other books are excluded. So if the deuteros truly belong to the Bible as the RCC teaches, one significant insight on the protocanonical books does not invalidate the deuteros. The seven books may later integrate with the sixty-six books under this model in a way that was not still articulated.

An example may help: Jews even nowadays have been drawing significant insights from the structure of the Torah. These insights unwittingly integrate with Christian claims. We don't need them, but they may be additional evidence that further leads us to appreciate the divine origin of the Pentateuch. The fact that Jews even in post-Calvary days can draw profound insights from the Torah that perfectly integrate with Christian revelation does not negate that the rest of the Bible is inspired. It only enriches our already existing overall appreciation for the Christian message. And may even help a Jew to be attracted to the Gospel as he indirectly learns it from the mouth of their own Rabbis.

I have already shown that the present study is consistent with "the Bible itself". It actually vindicates the Bible. I have been demonstrating this over and over again.

One more example: a person can have his heart touched by the Gospel and become a Catholic after hearing a Catholic teacher's lecture which demonstrates the supernatural unity of Scripture by exposing God's salvation history plan in a nutshell. In that lecture, he may ommit some Bible books, but his omission of some books doesn't mean he negates the inspiration of these books.

I think you are just trying to find an excuse not to look at the evidence. It is a pretty common human reaction that we all have. But look at Gilbert for example. He understood that he had to look at the evidence if he was to form an opinion on the subject. And thus he began to examine it and ask questions.

If someone doesn't think that the Bible Wheel is worth examining, there's no problem; he will just drop it. But if he does want to "prove it wrong," he of course needs to interact with the evidence.

You cannot at the same time refuse to look at the evidence and say that the evidence is flawed. Your heart thus needs to choose to either drop the subject or begin reading the Bible Wheel book. (It's free.)

The Bible Wheel is valid if the distinctive themes of the Books track with the symbolic meaning of the Letters. Does Genesis have features that uniquely associate it with the meaning of Aleph? Does Exodus relate to Bet? Do the themes of Leviticus have anything to do with the symbolic meaning of Guimel? And so it goes. Note that it is a pretty wide claim. The books should distinctively track with the alphabet. The keywords in the acrostics are uniquely associated with the themes of the corresponding Bible books. And that is exactly what it does. You can only know it if you examine it.

Of course the study of the Bible Wheel helps us to memorize and learn Scripture as we strive to define the distinguishing themes of each book. And it is in a sense a "revelation" in the same way as many Christians have been drawing "revelations" from Scripture in the last 2,000 years (like e.g. the raised arms of Moses in Exodus 17 depicting Christ on the Cross). I prefer "insight" or "illumination" rather than "revelation" because the latter may be misunderstood in the sense of public inspired Revelation.

But the Bible Wheel is one insight on Scripture that further illustrates the supernatural unity of the Bible. It is a powerful meditation - a bird's eye view - on salvation history. It gives glory to the Author of Scripture.

Online communication doesn't work like normal average conversation. You are inferring that I am angry but I am not angry in any way. It is a pleasure to discuss God's Word. I think you're just confounding my clarity with anger. I'm only being very clear and to-the-point in what I'm saying and that may be confounded with irritation.

Many blessings in the peace of Christ,
Victor

SORRY Such a position denies both God and the bible they claim to beleive.

2 Tim. 3:12-17 [retained in the KJB]

"Indeed all who desire to live a godly life in Christ Jesus will be persecuted, while evil men and impostors will go on from bad to worse, deceivers and deceived. But as for you, continue in what you have learned and have firmly believed, knowing from whom you learned it and how from childhood you have been acquainted with the sacred writings which are able to instruct you for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus. All scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, equipped for every good work"

If this in NOT true then the bible is worthless!

If it is true [IT IS!] then on what basis do they remove seven entire books?

Love and prayers,
Pat

One has to know more and know better than God Himself to accept this baloney.

__________________
PJM


http://working4christ.wordpress.com

Can we partake of God's GLORY and NOT partake of His PASSION? NO!

A.B. Fulton Sheen: "The truth is the truth even if nobody believes it, and a lie is still a lie, even if everybody believes it."

I'm new to this Forum, but not to the Bible Wheel which I have been studying for a number of years. The one thing that always surprises me is the immediate reaction by many folks who are introduced to the Bible Wheel, they seem to think that in someway it seeks to interpret the Bible....that couldn't be farther from the truth.

1) The Bible Wheel is nothing more or less than the 66 book Protestant Canon which itself is a subset of the 73 book Deuterocanon. Nothing has been changed and nothing has been taken away.

2) In its simplest form the Bible Wheel is merely the books of the Protestant Bible that are found in every book store (practically every Motel room too!) in this country, presented as a chart (much like what one would do for a Bible study).

3) The author of the Bible Wheel did what any student could have done if asked to present the books of the Bible in the form of a chart....I stress nothing has been done to the linear structure of the Bible, so in that sense those who dismiss the Bible Wheel are dismissing the Bible.

4) The author did not invent the 66 book Protestant Bible....he merely took a book that was available to him in any bookstore and found an amazing pattern in its structure. I would think every Bible believing Christian on the planet would be rejoicing and giving glory to God for His marvelous works, instead of trying to pick apart and discredit someone who is praising God's Word.

I think they are finding patterns where none exist.

First of all, the New Testament was written in Greek and in Aramaic; not Hebrew, so you can't count them. You are left with 39 books in the Protestant canon, which is not divisible by 22 - or else you have 46 books in the Catholic canon, which is also not divisible by 22. Then there is the Greek canon - but that one exists only in Greek, and not all of the books in it were originally written in Hebrew - some of them were originally written in the Babylonian language, and others were written in Aramaic.

Next, I feel certain that all of the books that were originally written in Hebrew did, in fact contain at least most of the letters of the Hebrew alphabet, so you could put them in any order you wanted to, and based on the finding of the Hebrew letter within the text of the book, there you'd be - you'd have it matching your pattern.

__________________
According to Quentin Tarentino, (Kill Bill Volume 2) Clark Kent is Superman's opinion of the human race. It occurs to me that, using the same logic, Jesus of Nazareth is God's.

Tiber Swim Team - Class of 2001

First off, the basic fundamental foundation upon which the Bible Wheel rests is the linear order of the 66 book Protestant Bible, not the languages in which the Bible was written. Secondly, the author did not set out to try and make a pattern out of a particular Bible, it just so happened that the 66 book Bible was the one he had, and of course 66 naturally divides by 3 which gives three cycles of 22 books. Like I said any student asked to create a chart using the books of the Bible could have done the same thing as the author of the Bible Wheel.

Until the foundation of the Bible Wheel is established as being based on the exact order of the Bible there is no need to bring different languages into the picture. The one thing we know for certain is that a good portion of the Old Testament was originally written in Hebrew, and Hebrew has 22 letters which are clearly defined in Psalm 119.

The suggestion was explicitly that the 22-letter Hebrew alphabet correlated to the 66-book "proto-canon" and that this was a marvelous example of God's mysterious ways. This implies that the 66 book "proto-canon," in the order commonly presented in English Protestant editions, is somehow divinely sanctioned.

This is no more or less wondrous than the various observations built upon the COMPLETELY MAN-MADE chapter and verse numbers (such as "the middle verse" of the Bible). As such it falls into the same category as any number of other parlor tricks.

__________________
"Strive for peace with all men, and for the holiness without which no one will see the Lord." Heb. 12:14

Crossed the Tiber 1980 (no, I can't swim)

Just because this pattern is implicit in the structure of the Bible has no bearing on what that implies...facts are just facts. The author who discovered the Bible Wheel structure didn't create this pattern to prove the Protestant Bible was divinely sanctioned....that is what others have implied....he merely discovered the pattern and presented it as a glorious example of God's design.

Tell him to take his meds.

[quote=FreeButterfly;7087680]that is what others have implied..../QUOTE]

What others have implied? Does this mean the thread title is an accident?

more to the point, he began with a hypothesis and went looking for evidence to prove it correct.

__________________
"Strive for peace with all men, and for the holiness without which no one will see the Lord." Heb. 12:14

Crossed the Tiber 1980 (no, I can't swim)

Ranp,

I read your post several times and I must confess that I don't quite understand what you mean. I suspect I grasped some of it, but I'm not sure. Maybe you refer to the cum hoc ergo propter hoc fallacy or something similar.

It would be better if we moved slowly and you could rephrase your objection so that I can go over it step by step.

Victor

I am reposting this Victor, so that you do not lose sight of it:

Hi Victor,

While I await your response to my objections on post #39 (there is significance in that post number - there are only 39 OT books in the Protestant revised canon) I would like to address two quick issues:

1) What is the Catholic proto-Canon? I have seen this term used by you, but have no idea of its meaning.

2) You claim a logical fallacy in my reasoning here:

My statement "But one of the arguments I would like to see addressed is why there is a complete silence from other Protestant theologians and scholars. Are there any Protestants, other than those affiliated with the Bible Wheel, who proclaim this amazing discovery? If it could be thoroughly studied, affirmed, and proclaimed by the Protestant communities Mass attendance might drop even further."

Your statement "Your objection also has an implicit problem - it suggests that truth is determined by polls. Most "Bible scholars" deny that Scripture is inspired, but this doesn't change the fact that Scripture is inspired. There was a time when academics didn't think earth orbited around the sun and one could ask the same question you did. In other words, your reasoning is just a logical fallacy - an argumentum ad populum. The Bible Wheel being valid or not doesn't depend on acceptance by the scholarly community. We should use our God-given minds to assess the evidence."

The only way for a logical fallacy to occur would be if I had posited an argument, gave reasons to support my premise, and then drew a conclusion that I claimed to be true. I did no such thing in my statement.

It is common-sense to ask other people's opinions regarding topics we have no familiarity with, but not to draw a conclusion from their opinion.

So I await your response to my objections in post #39 and what in the world is meant by Catholic proto-Canon.

That is just a cute coincidence. The similarity is merely superficial. If you search the Web you will also find other stuff that bears the same name, such as the "Bible Wheel of Fortune" game.

I'm pretty sure that Richard didn't have this game in mind when he gave the name "Bible Wheel" to the correlation between the books and the letters.

That is a very obscure patent file that only recently was published on the Web. The Bible Wheel study existed long before this file could be electronically retrieved. In fact, we only found it on the Web because we were looking for info on the Bible Wheel study.

The name Bible Wheel was chosen because it is a Bible study based on the circular structure of the Bible. I could go on explaining the intrabiblical significance of this name but it suffices for now.

Even if for some weird reason Richard had copied the name of this game and the concept of placing "books" on "spokes," the game still has nothing to do with the Bible Wheel study. The Wheel correlates Hebrew letters to Bible books, and that patent has nothing to do with the Hebrew alphabet and the corresponding correlation.

While you are waiting for Victor's response to your post I thought I would jump in and briefly address your points.

1) ORIGINS: You claim that the Bible Wheel is not fully derived from Scripture because the author received inspiration from the Sepher Yetzirah. My response to that would be: just because one is inspired by an outside source does not make the Bible Wheel any less the Bible. When you look at the Bible Wheel what else is there besides the Bible?

2) Alphabetic Verses & Keywords: The Alphabetic Keywords are those specific Hebrew words that God inspired the writer of Psalm 119 to use in each of the 8 verses to represent the Hebrew Alphabet. Those specific words are what the author claims to have been instrumental in finding meaningful connections to the rest of Scripture. If you really want to understand the importance of the Alphabetic Keywords in Psalm 119 and the other Alphabetic Verses of the Bible you need to carefully read the Bible Wheel book or go to his web-site.

I'll finish in the next post because it says my post it too long.

What I am saying is that no matter how perfect the Bible Wheel is it cannot be anything more than a simple coincidence. Why? Because the truth of the Bible is independant of any mathamatical model. Likewise, the structure of the Bible Wheel is independant of the truth of the Bible. They only correlate, there is absolutely no cause-effect relationship between them, thus they are not associated. Therefore, the Bible Wheel absolutely cannot in any manner ever prove the Protestant Canon is correct. Especially since as Catholics we know beyound all doubt that the Protestant Canon is incorrect. Truth is independant of sturcture. For example, you can write the same truth several sentences with different sturcture. You can also write the same lie in several sentences with different sturcture. The truth of the Bible comes from God, not the structure of itself. The full truth of God is found only in the complete (Catholic) Bible and Holy Tradition, both of which were entrusted only to the Catholic Church by Jesus Christ.

Ran

Hi Ran,

I am quite astounded by your comments.

You state that Catholics say the Proto Canon is wrong! How can that be when the Proto Canon is contained in the Deutero Canon in its entirety? Are you claiming that part of the Deutero Canon (Catholic Bible) is incorrect?

Whether or not as you claim "The full truth of God is found only in the complete (Catholic) Bible" does not negate the fact that the Bible Wheel is ONLY the Bible and that Bible being the Proto Canon which is contained in the Catholic Bible. Facts are facts!

It is "incorrect" in that it is incomplete. The correct answer to the question, "how many books are there in the Old Testament" is, 43 - not 39.

But if we are dealing only with proto-canons, then it would be inconsistent to use both the proto-canon and the deutero-canon (which together add up to 27 books) of the New Testament, instead of just its proto-canon, which consists of only 17 books. It seems conveniently inconsistent.

__________________
According to Quentin Tarentino, (Kill Bill Volume 2) Clark Kent is Superman's opinion of the human race. It occurs to me that, using the same logic, Jesus of Nazareth is God's.

Tiber Swim Team - Class of 2001

I fail to see your logic...

It seems to me that you are somehow "hung up" on the number of books and how they add up? Maybe if we walk through this one step at a time you will see the logic of it.

First off the 66 book Protestant Bible exists as a complete book whether or not you feel it is only a part of a larger book (the 73 book Catholic Bible). The 66 books contain the same truth, though you feel its only part of the whole.

Secondly, there is a pattern implicit in the 66 book Bible whether or not you choose to recognize that or not, and that pattern has meaning if only because it is a structure in the Holy Bible which all Christians believe has meaning. The meaning of this pattern is just as valid as the alphabetical pattern found in Psalm 119, which concludes the point of any legitimate pattern found in the Bible was ultimately designed by God and was put there for a reason.

The fact that the Bible can be shown to have this structure called the "Bible Wheel" for obvious reasons, proves that this pattern was intended to be discovered....what it ultimately means is left to human interpretation.

The title of this Thread has nothing to do with the intentions of the author, he was not the one who started this Thread.

If that was the case with the author that he started with an hypothesis, then I guess it proved to be valid because the evidence was there to make his case...

Taking a moment to address the issue of the title of this Thread which has been brought up in numerous posts, I would like to say that one can choose to interpret its meaning in a positive way.

If the Bible Wheel proves that the Proto Canon is correct, and the Proto Canon is contained within the Deutero Canon, then that could mean the whole book which the Proto Canon is part of (Catholic Bible) is also correct...

The entire idea is based on an ancient gnostic infection on Judaism. Pure self-serving sophistry that can be used to claim .... anything.

__________________
"There may yet be admirers of Cuban communism in certain precincts of Berkeley or Cambridge, but it's hard to find them in Havana." -Fidel Castro 2010

Right - it's part of a book. And it's totally random to pick those particular 66 books. If we are dealing with the Protocanon of the Old Testament, that makes 39 books. If we are dealing with protocanons in general, then we are looking at 39+17=16+40=56 books; not 66. 66 books is just a random set. It doesn't correlate with anything.

The pattern of the Old Testament is even more clear when you include all 46 books - and without the need of a "Bible Wheel."

__________________
According to Quentin Tarentino, (Kill Bill Volume 2) Clark Kent is Superman's opinion of the human race. It occurs to me that, using the same logic, Jesus of Nazareth is God's.

Tiber Swim Team - Class of 2001

I don't get it? How can it be totally random to use the 66 books that make up the entire Proto Canon?

It's just the Bible....

You aren't - that's my point. You're using the protocanon of the Old Testament, plus the protocanon of the New Testament, plus the deuterocanon of the New Testament.

It would be more consistent either to use both protocanons, and neither deuterocanon (56 books), or to use both protocanons, and both deuterocanons (73 books) or else only the Hebrew books (42 books) or else only the protocanon of the Old Testament (39 books) or something along those lines.

The 66 books is just about purely random, based only on mistakes made by third-generation Protestants, and not based on anything related to the inspiration of the Bible itself.