For most of the years since I discovered the Bible Wheel in 1995 I felt it was pretty much “self-evident” that God had designed it. The patterns seemed so obvious and profound. I could not imagine how they could have happened by chance, and it seemed impossible that some secret group of humans had done it since the Jews would have had to anticipate the later Christian NT when they put together the OT. So it seemed like an air-tight iron-clad case. I filled my website with the evidence. I wrote a 412 page book. I was dumbfounded that most folks, including Bible-believing Christians, could not see what I saw.
My conviction was strengthened by that fact that no one came close to presenting anything like a significant challenge to my claims despite endless hours on very hostile forums hosted by Christians, Jews, and Skeptics. I believed that the Bible Wheel was truly perfect in the sense explained in the Bible Wheel Challenge:
THE BIBLE WHEEL CHALLENGE asserts that the Christian canon is truly perfect in the twofold sense that 1) no rearrangement of its books would improve upon the patterns discovered on the Bible Wheel, and 2) any rearrangement would cause an obvious degradation of existing patterns. The challenge is for the opponent to suggest a rearrangement and present arguments for why such a change would produce patterns equal to or superior to those presently seen in the Bible Wheel. This challenge simultaneously proves the invincibility of the Bible Wheel even as it demonstrates the vacuity of the skeptics canard that “patterns mean nothing because they can be found in anything.” It is an extremely powerful challenge because it can not be refuted without interacting with the data, and the data is the touchstone that proves the Bible Wheel.
Unfortunately, I never could find even one person out of the seven billion on this planet who would respond to this challenge. So like most things, if you want something done right, you need to do it yourself.
I think I’ve finally found a way to explain the Bible Wheel without any appeal to God, angels, or any other metaphysical woo-woo. I think the Bible Wheel evolved through a scribal selection process as the text was edited and rearranged by the countless scribes over the centuries before the printing press.
This idea came to me two days ago when Rose and I were on our three mile morning walk. She mentioned how the Bible Wheel was not as perfect as I thought it was. She explained that though it might be “optimal” given the 66 books, it was no where near as good as it could have been if I could have edited those books myself to make them fit the pattern even better. And that’s the key to the error in my Bible Wheel Challenge. Yes, the structure of the Christian Canon may be “optimal” given the 66 books, but it is nowhere near what we would expect if it were designed by an infinitely intelligent God who was free to write the books any way he wanted to.
And then I realized that this is exactly what we see in the evolution of species. They “look” designed because they are made of many parts that work together in amazing ways. People ask “how could that tiger just happen by chance?” Their error, of course, is that it didn’t happen by chance. It happened through a process of natural selection acting upon variations in the gene pool. And the lack of “perfection” becomes obvious when we look closely at the animals that were supposedly so well designed. We see thousand of “design flaws” everywhere we look. This is because evolution has no “foresight” and so might go one way and then another and so arrives at a good, but not optimal structure. This is exactly what I see in the Bible Wheel. There is enough evidence to show that it did not “happen by chance” but it’s not nearly good enough to prove that it was “intelligently designed.” So where’s the midpoint of these two excluded extremes? Evolution.
Michael Shermer accurately describes humans as “pattern-seeking story-telling animals” that are “quite adept at telling stories about patterns, whether they exist or not.” Now put these pattern-seekers in front of a “Holy Text” that they meditate upon day and night for fifteen hundred years (before the printing press) and watch how the document evolved over time. I’m not talking so much about the text itself, but rather the arrangement of the text – the order and content of the Canon – that resulted in the Bible Wheel. There were hundreds of variations for people to choose from. It took centuries for the final form to emerge under the action of the selective pressure of the scribes looking for, and imposing, patterns.
A brief look at the variations of the Christian canon during the first five centuries of the current era shows how many “genetic variations” were available for the scribes to select from. Here is a table given in James Moffatt’s Introduction to the Literature of the New Testament, (3rd ed. T&T Clark Ltd, 1981) where Moffatt he presented the variations in hte arrangements of groups of books. The abbreviations “Evv, Acts, Paul, Cath, Apoc.” stand for “Evanglia (Gospels), Acts, Pauline Epistles, Catholic Epistles (James, Peter, John, Jude) and Apocalypse (Revelation). Column B shows the pattern that was finally “selected” before the order was locked in place by the printing press. It is what we see in all modern Bibles.
| Moffett’s Table of the various orders of early NT Manuscripts (source) | ||||||
| A | B | C | D | E | F | G |
| Epiph.: Jerome: א: Codex Fuldensis, etc. | Council of Carthage: Amphil- ochius: Philastrius: Rufinus: Syriac Canon (om. Cath. and Apoc.), etc. | Chryso- stom. | Apost. Constit. ( ii.57). | Codex Alex- andrinus: Athanasius: Cyril: Leontius (6th cent.): Cassiodorus: Nicephorus (om. Apoc.), etc. | Council of Laodicea: Cyril of Jerusalem: John of Damascus, etc. | Augustine: Innocent 1.: Isidore of Spain (7th cent.), etc. |
| Evv Paul Acts Cath Apoc |
Evv Acts Paul Cath Apoc |
Paul Evv Acts Cath |
Acts Paul Evv |
Evv Acts Cath Paul Apoc |
Evv Acts Cath |
Evv Paul Cath Acts Apoc |
Now this table is represents only the most common arrangements. A much larger and more detailed list of 26 variations is found in The Canon Debate, edited by McDonald and Sanders, only one of which is identical in every way to the modern canon. An interesting curiosity, which may show the selection process in action, is the coupling of the book of Acts with Revelation either at the end of the canon or immediately after the Gospels. Was this a scribal intuition that these books “should” go together? If so, they would be pleased to see their intuition satisfied with the alignment of Acts and Revelation on Spoke 22. Likewise, the Song of Solomon was the final book on the canon list by Rufinus (404 C.E.), perhaps as an intuition of the love story being a consummation of the canon. If so, he too would be satisfied to see it’s alignment with Acts and Revelation on Spoke 22. It is a well-documented fact that many medieval Christian leaders wrote joint commentaries on the Song and the Apocalypse.
My hypothesis is also confirmed by this discussion of the arrangement of books found in A General Introduction to the Bible by Norman Geisler and William Nix. After discussing the various patterns of the canon in Hebrew, Greek, Latin, and English Bibles, they said this:
Because the present structure of the English Bible has been subject to several historical variations, it would be too much to assume that it is God-given. The order as we have it is not, however, purely arbitrary. In fact, the order shows evidence of being purposefully directed, at least insofar as it falls into meaningful categories, because it presents the historical unfolding of the drama of redemptive revelation.
This fits my thesis. The pattern is obvious and too well designed to be chance, but there is too much evidence of “historical variations” (or shall we say deliberate manipulation?) to say that it is “God-given.”
So that is my thesis. I think it is possible that the order of the canon, and hence the pattern of the Bible Wheel, was slowly selected from a wide variety of hundreds of possibilities over a period of fifteen hundred years to fit the intuitions and desires of the pattern-finding and pattern-creating scribes. This hypothesis explains how we got the patterns that could not have happened by chance, and why those patterns are inferior to what we would expect if the Bible were deliberately designed by an infinitely intelligent and wise God.
R.A.
This is my first time on the site, and wow…. : ) I too have moved away from “traditional” Christianity, but still hold the Bible to convey a message of truth, albeit one that is at times difficult. I can only guess at how busy you may be with running this site, answering questions, responding to messages (like mine), etc. But I do hope you will show the kindness and respect to this post as I have enjoyed seeing in many of your comments to others. I do regret that you have left Christianity alltogether, but do NOT regret you leaving fundamentalism. I have recently been exposed to a site full of some amazing teachings, which blend adherence to the Bible in totality, yet acknowledging the realm of the spirit and spirituality quite well. BTW, there is a very interesting article there on Hell, and how the traditional interpretation of it is incorrect – that one may be of particular interest to you. It’s called, I believe, “Will ALL be saved,” or something like that. You can find the link on the left side of the page. Anyway, the site is http://www.hallvworthington.com I would enjoy hearing some of your thoughts, although not before you’ve had a chance to look through it a little while….there’s a lot there. Thanks.
Hi Ryan,
I agree that there is much truth in the Bible. The problem is that it is mixed together with a lot of error, falsehood, and confusion. But that’s not too much of a problem – indeed, it can be a great help to see deeper truths – unless people are told that it is the “inerrant and infallible Word of God.” Fundamentalism is a mind-killer.
Thanks for the link. I will review as much as time permits (it’s very large). I glanced at their solution to the problem of hell. They quoted all the verses I used when I was attempting to be a Universalist. I finally decided that if Universalism is true then ultimately it wouldn’t matter what I believed about Christianity, so I still had not reason to go back to the faith. The real problems are that the Bible contains much that I simply do not believe starting from the creation story and running through the whole book to Revelation. I don’t even believe in a theistic style God that goes about doing things as if he were a bit player in the cosmic drama. That kind of God makes no sense to me anymore for many reasons, most notably the problem of unanswered prayers. The promises of the Bible, that there is a personal God who watches out for us and to whom we should pray for help in this life, are false. This is the most obvious problem with Christianity. The “two ton elephant” is that God does not, as a general rule, answer prayers.
Thanks for writing. I look forward to your response.
All the best,
Richard
I am still not too familiar with the “Bible wheel” in all it’s particulars, but I am a little more so as compared to yesterday. It seems pretty remarkable, and I have seen several posts by you in the past few months stating that you still don’t see how it could have been created by men, yet now that you don’t believe in a traditional God, you aren’t sure how it was created. Is that still your position, or do you now think that this “evolution” of scribes is sufficient to create the amazing, complex patters the Bible wheel has shown. It’s easy sometimes to forget how profound and amazing some of these patterns can be. Do you think patterns so remarkable are possible to have been made by “evolution” by men and thereby essentially created? And your “dumbo dream,” in which you found “Lord Jesus Christ” to numerically equal the key to the cosmos, and “his blood” as the key? The confirmations of 528, etc. Just random, false things? Perhaps…
As for your response, I apprecaite the timeliness. I also know I am not likely to be a match for you in a debate, and don’t find that debates on spiritual matters usually get anywhere, because there are presuppositions involved and because spiritual matters are, of course, in the realm of the spirit, which is invisible and intangible (yet real). There is also the matter of faith, which is a gift of God but is separate from logic, reason, and science. So I will give some responses, but likely won’t engage in too much “debate.” Not to say you are looking for this anyway.
The site I mentioned – there is much there, but I do think much of it is worth reading because it is not “traditional” Christianity, which is a good thing. Traditional Christianity, I have found, leads to cases similar to yours – people find nothing genuine and become disillusioned. The site’s position on hell, which I don’t endorse or reject at this point, is that there IS a hell, and it IS full of pain and misery, but it ISNT, as traditionally taught, “eternal” in the usual sense, and it isn’t necessarily a lake of burning sulphur in which a physical body is burned forever. It is, as I understand it, a place where our old “self” is purified and ultimately eradicated by repetition in the vices we were enslaved to, ultimately leading to repentance. But for those who rejected the “light” within them while on earth, even after this purification they will be on a lesser plane than those who followed the light within them (which is Jesus Christ – John 1:9) and attained to perfection while on earth. These people are FEW today, because the “church” is in great apostasy and looks nothing like what Christ instituted, especially in the west. We are largely selfish and averse to any suffering, which immediatley disqualifies us to really be followers of Christ and inheriters of the blessing, in Jesus own words (Matthew 10:37-39). To get a more full look at these things, read the full article I mentioned in my last post (which for you wouldn’t take too long). Also, an interesting article on this “light within,” which is a very important emphasis to the early “Quakers” and George Fox (who the authors of the site have reproduced works by and who they have learned from greatly). http://www.hallvworthington.com/whylight.html
Another you might find interesting and worth reading is: http://www.hallvworthington.com/George_Fox_Selections/foxkingdom.html -That link describes the “kingdom of God” which Jesus and the apostles spoke of as not being a physical place as much as a spiritual realm we can enter now. There’s so much there… I’m not a “follower” of the teachings there, but have found them challenging and very enlightening, and have only recently found it. I have found traditional “christianity” to be very shallow and false, but I continue to believe in God and in the death, resurrection and atonement of Jesus Christ. I just believe many so-called christians are not true disciples of Jesus, and the vast majority of the so-called church is not ordained of God at all and is no reflection of Him.
As for God not answering prayers, I can’t explain all of it, of course. But to say there are no supernatural answers to prayer (which you didn’t explicitly say, I realize) is very untrue. I could give many examples, from my own life and others, who you could contact to verify, but the point is there are certainly answers to prayer that go beyond chance or interpretation – specific, amazing things that the petitioner had no control over. Now, certainly there are prayers that are not answered. Please allow me to give a few BIBLICAL reasons for this:
“If I regard iniquity in my heart, The Lord will not hear.” -Psalm 66:18. This surely eliminates many people. ”
“But let him ask in faith, with no doubting, for he who doubts is like a wave of the sea driven and tossed by the wind. 7 For let not that man suppose that he will receive anything from the Lord; 8 he is a double-minded man, unstable in all his ways. -We must have faith and actually believe, without doubt, to ensure God’s answer to our prayer.
2 You lust and do not have. You murder and covet and cannot obtain. You fight and war. Yet you do not have because you do not ask. 3 You ask and do not receive, because you ask amiss, that you may spend it on your pleasures. 4 Adulterers and adulteresses! Do you not know that friendship with the world is enmity with God? Whoever therefore wants to be a friend of the world makes himself an enemy of God. -This too could eliminate many prayers.
7 Husbands, likewise, dwell with them (ones wife) with understanding, giving honor to the wife, as to the weaker vessel, and as being heirs together of the grace of life, that your prayers may not be hindered. -Etc.
I understand that these things could be seen as a “copout” as to why God doesn’t answer a prayer – there can always be an excuse as to why. But these are still reasonable and Biblical. These scriptures, coupled with the MANY miraculous, amazing answers to prayer which do and have occurred all the time, give at least part of an answer to this issue.
I realize you have other objections to Christianity, but I hope this at least gives you some understanding as to a possible explanation for the “non-answered prayer” one. I would be happy to give you examples of supernatural answers to prayer if you would like. Perhaps you were convinced of Christianity only from your dream, numerology, and the “Bible wheel,” and never really came to God by genuine faith and in the realm of the spirit. I think you essentially said so, that you were “blinded by the light” of the Bible. Well, it’s not the Bible, it’s the spiritual reality of the God of the Bible and the reality of the resurrection of Jesus Christ and the reality of his teachings. While I believe the Bible is true and it’s authors were inspired of God, some people revere it as on the same level as God Himself, which I believe is a mistake.
Thanks,
Hey there Ryan,
You wrote:
Those are some excellent questions! I don’t have all the answers yet. The “evolutionary explanation” does answer a lot, but there are other aspects that seem difficult to explain that way. The most obvious are the Alphabetic KeyLinks where we find unique material from the Alphabetic Verses on the corresponding Spokes. For example, the prophecy about the bones of Christ not being broken is given in the Shin verse of Psalm 34, and that prophecy is quoted only in the Gospel of John on Spoke 21 which corresponds to Shin. I have found nearly two dozen Alphabetic KeyLinks (see table), and I have no naturalistic or “evolutionary” explanation for them at this time. But then, I’m not committed to a “naturalistic” explanation of everything. I think Reality is fundamentally “spiritual” and many things can be understood only if we understand that Mind is the foundation of Reality. Thus many things like the Dumbo Dream, syncrhonicities, telepathy, and so forth are real but not due to material explanations. But neither do they necessarily confirm traditional Christian theology which I think has many errors. So I’m just open minded about such things right now.
I’m glad you are not interested in a hostile “debate” since that doesn’t interest me either. But a good discussion? Absolutely! And as I noted above, I do believe in “spiritual” things. I just don’t believe in the way it is expressed in traditional Christianity. I think there might be some real value in Mystical Christianity. I’m exploring that a lot right now.
I appreciate that view as an improvement, but I find it fundamentally inadequate because the whole idea of Christianity is that we are sinners in need of a savor, and I don’t think that is true. The whole “sinner/salvation” paradigm seems flawed to me. To redeem Christianity, it needs to be revisioned so that it’s truly universalist light can shine forth.
I’m glad you noticed that I didn’t say God never answers prayers. How could I say that? But I do know that he does not, as a general rule, answer prayers, and that this directly contradicts both the Bible and the traditional Christian doctrine. I just don’t see any reason to believe the worldview of a “god” who goes about “doing things” – it’s just not how reality seems to be. I think there is a “god” in the sense of the Ground of Being or “Cosmic Mind” but I don’t think it correct to think of God as a separate “he” that sits enthroned in heaven.
Well, thanks, but I’ve had lots of people tell me their personal stories of “supernatural answers to prayer” and most look like selective memory or just plain old coincidence. It means nothing if you had an “answer” to this or that prayer, since the problem is that God does not, as a general rule, answer prayers.
How would a person ever know the real “reason” they came to faith? When I was a Christian, I said and felt the same things that all true Christians said and felt. I believed that I had encountered the true God in Jesus Christ and I based my faith on that just like any other Christian. The dreams I had and the knowledge I discovered concerning numerology and the Bible Wheel only confirmed the faith I already had.
I very much appreciate your comments. I hope they will continue.
All the best,
Richard
I hope this answer will remain cogent, as its been a while since I’ve replied, for which I apologize. I also hope you will not abandon the possibility that Christianity is true – by which I mean the scriptures (Bible), properly interpreted, convey a message of truth and that the relationship with God we see therein is possible, and that Christ truly did rise from the dead to bring men to the Father. And in that statement one problem is illuminated: most of what is called “Christianity” is based on partial and/or faulty interpretation of the scriptures. The truth is, the real, full, undiluted message of the scriptures demands a complete devotion to God in Jesus Christ, and a total denial of self. This is to hard for many to swallow, so they accept and go for the many easier, diluted alternatives. But with the allowance for self comes the corruptions of self, which become apparent and cause believers and non-believers alike to discount Christianity as a religious facade and false set of beliefs, with no substance.
I see what you are saying with regards to reality being fundamentally “spiritual” and mind being the foundation of reality (although are those compatible statements?), meaning that I understand that belief, at least on a surface level. And I may agree with that belief more than most Christians would. However, I still find it interesting, if that is the case, that the “Cosmic Mind” or “original spirit,” if indeed this force is behind the universe, gave you the dreams you had (dumbo, etc) which directly “led” you to the Bible and the Bible Wheel. Why do that if both the Bible and Bible Wheel revelation are essentially false and lead away from truth? In reading your primary reasons for ceasing to believe, I see most prominent not the presence of a more convincing alternative, but rather a difficulty accepting certain things (an eternal hell, unanswered prayer, etc), which led you to seek alternatives. There are answers to these objections that allow for the reality of Jesus’ resurrection (which I believe is the foundation of the entire Christian faith and is an actual, empirical event (albeit not without a need for faith)). I gave some reasons in my last post for unanswered prayers, and stand by those reasons. They are biblical and reasonable. So given that, along with the many testimonies of supernaturally answered prayer (which I may provide sometime), I think it is reasonable to believe God does answer prayer given that one meets the Biblical conditions (not a cop-out, just an adherence to the conditions given in scripture). The truth is, God has made provision for the destruction of sin within a believer, and until that happens, there will be some hindrance in faith and communion with God. He is holy, period, and HE is the very ground of our moral knowledge itself.
You are not the first person I know of to have been a self-proclaimed “believer” who later renounced their belief. If I may, let me give one large reason I believe many are “falling away” from the Christian faith. I alluded to this in my last post, but perhaps it would be good for me to elaborate here. I believe what many self-proclaimed “Christians” fail to realize, with very regrettable results, is the religion called “Christianity” and those people called “Christians” today are largely foreign to what Christ and the first apostles instituted and lived, which can be clearly seen in an inclusive, unbiased reading of the New Testament. As some have said, if a young child were abandoned on a remote island alone as a child, and only had the Bible to read, then were rescued as an adult and went to the typical local “church,” they would not recognize it whatsoever. Even those who don’t believe can see this truth. While some cultural adaptation is inevitable, I believe the “church” today is full of men’s traditions and self-serving leadership, therefore cannot produce and encourage real DISCIPLES (ones who learn from and come to be and act in the very same manner as) Jesus Christ. Instead, we see false doctrine, hypocrisy, all forms of wickedness, pride, envy, greed, etc., among those who call themselves Christians! But remember, Jesus said himself that there are many tares among the wheat (false believers among the true), and many who performed many religious and “good” actions in Jesus’ name will be rejected in the day of judgment because He never really knew them. But I suppose I’m elaborating the point a bit for this context. Suffice it to say again, that many come to what is called Christianity, but never really come to the true faith and the true way which was “once for all delivered to the saints.” They are not the same. Perhaps this was you? Without a real, spiritual encounter with God’s presence, it is very easy to cease believing in God or Jesus Christ, particularly given the difference between what one sees in the Bible and what one sees in the church or in one’s heart, and given the more “pleasant” ideas and teachings out there. I believe fundamentalists and dispensationalists and most other “ists” look far to much to the natural, rather than spiriutal, nature of Jesus’ teachings. On this perhaps we agree. For example: “And being asked by the Pharisees, when the kingdom of God cometh, he answered them and said, The kingdom of God cometh not with observation: neither shall they say, Lo, here! or, There! for lo, the kingdom of God is within you.” (Luke 17:20-21 ASV). Those looking for a physical kingdom, still today, are, I believe, largely missing it. However, I do not believe this discounts the many practical teachings of the scriptures.
As for God not being a separate “He” in the heavens: again, it’s difficult or impossible to “prove” much when talking of matters of the spirit and faith. But perhaps God is referred to that way at times in the Bible to aid in understanding, even if He is not exactly a being confined to one place. The Bible does also teach that God knows all, His presence/spirit is everywhere, and that He is Spirit. So while I don’t think “matter” is God, I do believe the Bible also teaches God is more than just a being sitting on a throne as we would immediately think of it. To speak of God as a “He” doing things on earth or among people could also be to speak of God the Spirit interacting with people or situations on a physical plane, but using physical/geographic terms to describe this doesn’t mean God Himself is to be totally understood that way or is confined to time and space. Surely we don’t fully understand it, to say we do is foolish, but that doesn’t mean seeking more understanding is useless, either. He is revealed in His creation, but isn’t a part of that creation per se.
Finally, as to mankind being sinners in need of a savior, I am not sure why you think this is so flawed. A partial definition of sin is to go against ones conscience or against a known law of God. When we do that, we show ourselves to serve sin/self (in the nature of Satan) and to be enemies of God, and therefore in need of reconciliation. All mankind has sinned against God, even unbelievers: “For when Gentiles who do not have the Law do instinctively the things of the Law, these, not having the Law, are a law to themselves, in that they show the work of the Law written in their hearts, their conscience bearing witness, and their thoughts alternately accusing or else defending them…” (Romans 2:14-15). Jesus Christ didn’t come just to pay the penalty for sin, so that we can continue to live selfish, rebellious lives yet still enter God’s kingdom. He came to take away sin in believers and purify a people for God, who will do all God’s good works. This teaching has largely been lost. So the “savior” paradigm is more than just forgiveness, it’s about recreating sons and daughters of God, who are pure, holy, and full of God’s nature. “For the grace of God has appeared (to us and in us), bringing salvation for all people, teaching us to renounce ungodliness and worldly passions, and to live self-controlled, upright, and godly lives in the present age, waiting for our blessed hope, the appearing (this word literally means appearing within us) of the glory of our great God and Savior Jesus Christ, who gave himself for us to redeem us from all lawlessness and to purify for himself a people for his own possession who are zealous for good works.” (Titus 2:11-14). The kingdom of God is a spiritual kingdom within his people, that is what Christ came to establish. And this certainly is needed, in my opinion.
Again, I’m sorry this was delayed and may seem disjointed. I hope it made sense, however, and gave you some food for thought and some spiritual truth to digest.
Hi RC,
Thanks for your thoughtful post.
I think you have a misconception about the idea of the “Cosmic Mind” underlying Reality. Such a “God” – Ground of Being – has no “will” in the sense we typically see in traditional theistic religions like Christianity where he acts like a “guy in the sky” who “has a plan” and acts like any other bit player in this cosmic drama. It is that concept of traditional Christian theism that I reject. And for good reason – the problem is not so much “unanswered prayers” (though that is very significant because it directly contradicts the Biblical promises) but rather the way the whole world is run. If there really were a God who answers prayers to help find lost puppies and win football games, but who ignores the suffering of millions of people on this earth, then that God would be an inconceivable monster. That’s the real problem – the universe does not operate as if there were an intelligent agent making detailed decisions about who is going to win the Superbowl and who is going to get killed in the next earthquake.
The same confusion is seen in your question about why the “Cosmic Mind” would “give” me the dreams that led to Christ and the Bible Wheel. That’s not how the Ground of Being works. Normal dreams emerge from our subconscious mind without anyone “choosing” to give them. Yet they are very detailed and full of “intelligent design.” This is because they emerge from mind, but there is no hint of any conscious will directing the dream. The same goes for the dreams and synchronicities that led to knowledge of the Bible. The Bible is one of the most influential books on the planet, it is no wonder that it would be central to dreams that spontaneously emerge. Such dreams reveal an implicate order underlying the reality we perceive. This certainly is as good an explanation as Theism, and it doesn’t contradict observable reality the way that Theism does.
I agree with your criticism of the church, but I don’t see why you choose to believe the book – the Bible – that it gave you. If the tree (corporate Church) is rotten, so will be the fruit (Bible) that it produces.
How do you know that you can trust the Bible? Have you not read the commands of God? KILL EVERYONE except 32,000 sexy virgins and distribute them to the soldiers? (Numbers 31). You say that God “is holy, period, and HE is the very ground of our moral knowledge itself.” If that’s true, then we know with absolute certainty that God is not the God of the Bible. It is impossible to say that mass murder and mass rape represent the moral commands based on Almighty God who is the “very ground of our moral knowledge!
And this is the biggest problem with Christianity. I listed it briefly in point #2. The Bible attributes MORAL ABOMINATIONS to God Himself. Apologists twist words beyond all recognition in their attempt to save God from what the Bible says about him. Well, it just doesn’t work. I’ve never seen a single valid justification for the murder of the Midianites or the Canaanites. And even if some clever word-twisting lawyer/apologists could find an defense, it would only prove that the God of the Bible is not the ground of moral absolutes since we have to use our own reasoning to “correct” the obvious flaws in the Bible.
If it were “me” then maybe it’s you too! Indeed, maybe every person who claims to have had a transformative encounter with Christ is just deluded and none of it is true. There is no evidence to prove the reality of your personal experience, and your words are no different than the words I spoke when I was a Christian. So how can you have any confidence that your encounter is real? Perhaps you will fall away tomorrow. You have no way of knowing because you don’t know the future.
I don’t think it “helped” to understand God that way. It looks more like a projection from an immature mind – a “daddy in the sky” who will take care of us.
But who knows? Neither you nor I have any certain knowledge about the nature of God. So I don’t worry about it at all. It obviously doesn’t matter since God didn’t bother to make it clear to everyone.
This touches the primary flaw of the Gospel. I forgive people every day. I am reconciled with people every day. I didn’t have to make a human sacrifice to enable me to be kind and to forgive. Why can’t God simply forgive? The answer is simple – the Gospel is the product of a brutal culture with a perverse concept of morality that demanded blood to “atone” for sins.
Thanks for taking the time to discuss this with me.
All the best,
Richard
Is there a way to buy the bible database? For instance, the first sentence in genesis= 2701 which is the 73rd triangular number. The same sentence generates an equation which approximates the scientific term known as Pi…A X B X c / a+b+c……I’ve always wanted a program or database to look for more of these types of patterns…they are certainly not random and seem to require a computer to find. John 1;1 has a similar pattern in Greek= 3627…using the same formula as above, for instance, the scientific constant known as e is approximated. The depth of these patterns is mindboggling and still being uncovered
Continuing if I may,to inspire more thought on what you feel may be the flaw or flaws of the gospel, such as forgiveness…Do we need it…Muslims don’t believe it so they go about blowing things up including their own children. The gospel message is more about reminding us that we cannot be perfected without God and that we are flawed because of Adam’s sin………That first sentence structure is like a signature of God since it is embedded with code identifying our DNA make-up…
The Biblical God declares himself as the only one who declares the end from the beginning…in the beginning, the days of Noah, the major offense was the corruption of our worlds DNA or genetics structure thanks to the fallen angels and our willingness to sin.
Jesus reminds us that we are the Temple of God and say’s ” He that defileth the temple, him will I also destroy..this is symbolic of the beast and the renewed confusion of our genetic structure.
And of course, many of us know about todays tampering with genetics from our crops to crimera’s and talk of humans “Evolving”
As Jesus stated such as in the days of Noah, so shall the end days be…is this the end from the beginning that God declared?
Hi Bruce,
I don’t have the database for sale. You must use it online.
There are indeed many fascinating patterns in the alphanumeric structure of Scripture, especially Genesis 1:1. But I personally don’t find the appearance of “pi” very interesting. It’s only an approximation and I don’t see how it “means” anything. So it looks like a “mere coincidence” to me.
All the best,
Richard
PS: Is that your real name? Or are you a Batman fan?
Hello again Bruce,
You have been misinformed by all the anti-Islam propaganda. Muslims have plenty of “forgiveness.” The Koran says that Allah is “very forgiving” if you repent. And there are many other verses in the Koran that teach forgiveness.
But don’t get me wrong, the Koran is pretty much a mixed up copy of the Bible, so it has many of the same problems. And worse, it lacks the teachings of Christ concerning loving others.
I agree that there are some amazing connections with DNA and Genesis 1. But that doesn’t fix all the other problems in the Bible, like the false creation story (there is no dome holding up waters) and the genocide, and all the other moral abominations. So I don’t know what to do with it. All the evidence for design in the Bible Wheel and the Holographs remains, but I don’t believe the message. I don’t believe people go to hell for sins and I don’t believe there is a God who answers prayers. And most of the prophecies in the Bible failed, e.g. Babylon was never destroyed violently like Isaiah 13 says.
Also, folks have always thought that we were living in the “last days.” That’s one of the most common errors of Christians. It’s really gone crazy in the last 64 years since the modern secular state of Israel was founded. But times running out for folks who think that the “end” must happen within a “generation” of 1948. Date setters have always been wrong, 100% of the time. A perfect record of error.
Thanks for stopping by and sharing your comments.
Richard
Michael Shermer accurately describes humans as “pattern-seeking story-telling animals” that are “quite adept at telling stories about patterns, whether they exist or not.”
But you should expect to find patterns in a self replicating fractal world that is built on algorithms.
And what if after thousands of years you noticed some that are critical?
namaste
I agree with Shermer’s comment, but that doesn’t obviate the many objectively real patterns that humans have discovered in science and mathematics. And as far as I can tell, the evidence for the Bible Wheel pattern remains, despite the fact that I no longer have any certainty about what it “means.”
Hi Richard:
Just had to jump into the fray!….
You said earlier …
Tt fits my thesis. The pattern is obvious and too well designed to be chance, but there is too much evidence of “historical variations” (or shall we say deliberate manipulation?) to say that it is “God-given.”
So that is my thesis. I think it is possible that the order of the canon, and hence the pattern of the Bible Wheel, was slowly selected from a wide variety of hundreds of possibilities over a period of fifteen hundred years to fit the intuitions and desires of the pattern-finding and pattern-creating scribes. This hypothesis explains how we got the patterns that could not have happened by chance, and why those patterns are inferior to what we would expect if the Bible were deliberately designed by an infinitely intelligent and wise God.
=============
However, broad you are painting the picture, you said before that the scribes were ignorant… now they are creating complex patterns over time? So the time factor creates more elaborate complex models?… That strikes me as a little odd since we have the I-Ching which continues to make “predictions” of a complex nature WITHOUT any scribe upgrades or interpretive arrangements.
The notion that intelligent life is a product of mere selection and evolutionary time constraints flies in the face of String theory and particle physics. Both models which seem to have little interest in the bigger picture of how life simply inserted itself into the sub-atomic particles which existed as objects with no ability to model the life principle.
Please comment…
Namaste,
Mystykal
Good morning Mystikal,
You said:
The idea that the scribes were ignorant and yet produced complex patterns is precisely analogous to how evolution works. I wonder if they may have been unconsciously responding to archetypes. For example, the idea of an all-encompassing alphabetic circle is archetypal.
As for the I Ching – I think it’s “predictions” are too subjective to be objectively verified. And I’m not sure how it relates to the question at hand.
When you say “mere” selection I get the impression that you don’t appreciate how powerful selection is. Look at a Great Dane vs. a Chihuahua. That is the product of selection. The only difference is that humans consciously selected whereas nature selects according to fitness.
What is the “life principle”? As far as I can tell, biological life is a physical process. The only philosophical challenge seems to be how (or if) consciousness arises from matter. Dualism vs. Monism. I tend towards Monism, but then the question becomes Materialism vs. Idealism. I tend towards Idealism since I can understand matter as an “object of consciousness” but I can’t understand how consciousness could be a property of matter. But on the other hand, the strong correlation of brain size with consciousness supports materialism. So it is all a mystery to me.
Great chatting,
Richard
Hi Richard:
I appreciate your quick response… Not sure I can always do the same. I appologize in advance for my spelling typos… At 1am my fingers dont seem to work all the time the way I think they should! … You said in another post…
I’m not committed to a “naturalistic” explanation of everything. I think Reality is fundamentally “spiritual” and many things can be understood only if we understand that Mind is the foundation of Reality. Thus many things like the Dumbo Dream, syncrhonicities, telepathy, and so forth are real but not due to material explanations. But neither do they necessarily confirm traditional Christian theology which I think has many errors. So I’m just open minded about such things right now.
=============
I am glad to see that open perspective coming from you. I do believe that your view of “traditional Christian theology” is anything but… Let me explain. The talking heads out there in TV land and all their like minded brethren – The so called “Fundamentalist” in the big picture do NOT speak for Christianity. Neither does the RC Church which includes the pope. All of these self-made authorities have created theological mountains out of Biblical mole hills. So much of your disdain for so called “Christian goospel” seems to me to be rooted in a misconception on your part to what actually constitutes “Christian Truth”.
You wrote:
The idea that the scribes were ignorant and yet produced complex patterns is precisely analogous to how evolution works.
===
In theory I suppose that is true. But no real evidence of the sort has ever happened in a visible jump from simple to complex visible in nature. So I assume you are taking that on Faith module #1 🙂 I just do not see the evidence for the evolutionary module considering the basic findings of Dr. Arp and the Hubble red-shift data which violates all big-bang fixed time frames for galaxy formation.
You said:
As for the I Ching – I think it’s “predictions” are too subjective to be objectively verified. And I’m not sure how it relates to the question at hand.
====
Are you familiar with the McKenna research into factuals and the I-Ching? I do not think that those models can be ignored and hense the predictive quality of the I-Ching is far from subjective when applied ove thousnds if not millions of years.
You said:
When you say “mere” selection I get the impression that you don’t appreciate how powerful selection is. Look at a Great Dane vs. a Chihuahua. That is the product of selection. The only difference is that humans consciously selected whereas nature selects according to fitness.
====
I do not see two trypes of dogs being anything that significant in relation to selection on a MACRO-evolutionary scale. And once again life – intelligent life forms cannot exist based on the time constraints of galactic formation and the time models inherent in the Big-Bang module. Period.
You said:
What is the “life principle”? As far as I can tell, biological life is a physical process. The only philosophical challenge seems to be how (or if) consciousness arises from matter.
===
The Life Principle is that notion that life is a separate quantity from matter. In the sense that consciousness does not appear to arise from mere matter. The universe has enough matter in it not to mention black holes and quazars to simply discredit any notion that intelligent life morphs out of anything resembling matter. To insist on such flies in the face of science.
So, I do appreciate that you are still accepting the Great Mystery as the Ultimate realization in life. (hint hint! LOL) Perhaps this is why masters of Martial arts practice mediatation. It would seem to open the door to such mystical experiences.
Namaste,
Mystykal
Good afternoon Mystykal,
Ha! I’ve had the same problem after a long day of typing. The fingers just quit responding.
What then do you think the “Gospel” really is? Is there any group that represents it?
It is difficult to “see” something that takes millions of years to happen. But the conclusion that evolution is a good explanation is not a “faith position” comparable to believing the Bible. Evolution is solid science based on many verifiable facts. For example, how do you explain the DNA evidence that shows common descent?
What do Dr. Arp’s contrary opinions have to do with evolution? Why do you find his arguments against current cosmological models compelling? Do you understand General Relativity?
I take it you mean “fractals” not “factuals.” Yes, I am familiar with his work. I think he was a fascinating man, though he had a lot of wacky ideas. His His Time Wave Zero contributed a lot to the silly 2012 craze. So much for “predictions” eh?
It sounds like you reject the age of the universe as being about 13.75 billion years. How old do you think it is?
There is no real distinction between “macro” and “micro” evolution. Given some more time, Chihuahuas and a Great Danes will become truly distinct species.
Have you ever read any books explaining evolution? I recommend The Making of the Fittest by Sean Carroll. It explains some of the most compelling evidence that most modern scientists find quite compelling.
The “Life Principle” is commonly known as Vitalism. It’s an ancient pre-scientific theory that has been around for thousands of years but is generally rejected now like other speculative substances and causes like pholgiston, the luminiferous aether, disease caused by demons, etc.
Do you have any evidence supporting your belief in the “Life Principle” or is it a consequence of your philosophy? I tend towards Idealism for philosophical reasons, and because I’m not confident that physics can explain consciousness. But I’m not a Vitalist because there is nothing about biological functions that can’t be explained in terms of physics as far as I know.
I am quite open to speculation about things that cannot yet be explained, but I’m quite resistant to believing those speculations if we have any way to know if they are true.
It is a joy discussing these things with you.
Richard
Hello Richard:
I am kind of confused as to why there is no “reply” line at the vottom of yur comments to me in particular…. Does that mean I should not comment further? LOL
I went ahead and copied your response to my comments below…. I really did find your comments quite interesting. I will just say that yes I do understand the evolutionary scheme quite well. Yes I have read Sean Carroll’s work and find it rather good. However, nothing I have read to date really addresses the issues that arise from the different time frames found in galactic formation Hubble Red-shift anomalies and Biological time and real earth time. No I do not think the 13 Billion year number is correct. I also do not believe in a “young earth” theory for the universe as a whole. The whole carbon dating game is a complete joke! What I do believe however is that the creation sequence and the flood story in the Bible might be some kind of code for what I see as some time keeping system for temple building or what is called “probationary time”. In other words a sequence of relational time events which would indicate some “divine” sequence which is found throuhout ALL spiritual writings. This is why I believe the Egyptians were obssessed with the after-life. They knew it to be real.
The “Gospel” as Christians call it – is nothing more than the concepts about behaviour and practices which allow the “divine” to interact with humans. The whole scheme of “salvation” imbedded in the languages of anciet cultures along with the Tower of Babal story whos strong evidence – i believe – for some “other-worldly” intelligence interacting with people. To the point that these people were scared and began to create systems of thought which was geared to address their fears. Hence the creation of the Egyptian Book of The Dead – and those types of supersitions and attempts for people to address the unknown future of the “after-life.
As to your question of do I believe in any one group of people haveing the true Gospel…. No I do not. However, I do believe there is a true system which if followed can and will lead to immortality… Jesus the Christ is NOT the saviour of the world as taught by Christians…. IHVH of the Jewish Talmud is credited with that distinction in my opinion. This model of ONE GOD is also the model found in gene sequencing. So that the connection between human DNA could have several sources – most logically we are all related through common decent. This does not answer the question of where does life come from or how does it permeate nature. By education I am a trained to understand human physiology and body functions. So I completely agree that science does tend to lean in one direction as to the origin of life being a by-product of these functions. But the mystery of how the fibers in the heart know how to beat and “sponteneously” do so is not explainable by any biological process.
You said: What do Dr. Arp’s contrary opinions have to do with evolution? Why do you find his arguments against current cosmological models compelling? Do you understand General Relativity?
I do have a basic understanding of the theory of General Relativity… The fact that the constraints of the Big Bang Module were first theorized by Dr. Arp as Dr. Hubbles assistant – and later discarded as false
by him does give reason to pause…
The problem with the evolutionary module is one of time… The universe hase to many stars galaxys and specifically glaxays connected to other galaxys which cannot fit into the time constraints of the evolutionary big-bang module. So that is the issue. No matter how the dots are strung together the basic essential evolutionary time module falls apart when trying to explain the formation of these super large structures.
That is all for now…
Namaste
Mystykal
R. A. McGough
Posted February 6, 2013 at 1:44 pm | Permalink
Good afternoon Mystykal,
“At 1am my fingers dont seem to work all the time the way I think they should! “
Ha! I’ve had the same problem after a long day of typing. The fingers just quit responding.
I am glad to see that open perspective coming from you. I do believe that your view of “traditional Christian theology” is anything but… Let me explain. The talking heads out there in TV land and all their like minded brethren – The so called “Fundamentalist” in the big picture do NOT speak for Christianity. Neither does the RC Church which includes the pope. All of these self-made authorities have created theological mountains out of Biblical mole hills. So much of your disdain for so called “Christian goospel” seems to me to be rooted in a misconception on your part to what actually constitutes “Christian Truth”.
What then do you think the “Gospel” really is? Is there any group that represents it?
In theory I suppose that is true. But no real evidence of the sort has ever happened in a visible jump from simple to complex visible in nature. So I assume you are taking that on Faith module #1 I just do not see the evidence for the evolutionary module considering the basic findings of Dr. Arp and the Hubble red-shift data which violates all big-bang fixed time frames for galaxy formation.
It is difficult to “see” something that takes millions of years to happen. But the conclusion that evolution is a good explanation is not a “faith position” comparable to believing the Bible. Evolution is solid science based on many verifiable facts. For example, how do you explain the DNA evidence that shows common descent?
What do Dr. Arp’s contrary opinions have to do with evolution? Why do you find his arguments against current cosmological models compelling? Do you understand General Relativity?
Are you familiar with the McKenna research into factuals and the I-Ching? I do not think that those models can be ignored and hense the predictive quality of the I-Ching is far from subjective when applied ove thousnds if not millions of years.
I take it you mean “fractals” not “factuals.” Yes, I am familiar with his work. I think he was a fascinating man, though he had a lot of wacky ideas. His His Time Wave Zero contributed a lot to the silly 2012 craze. So much for “predictions” eh?
I do not see two trypes of dogs being anything that significant in relation to selection on a MACRO-evolutionary scale. And once again life – intelligent life forms cannot exist based on the time constraints of galactic formation and the time models inherent in the Big-Bang module. Period.
It sounds like you reject the age of the universe as being about 13.75 billion years. How old do you think it is?
There is no real distinction between “macro” and “micro” evolution. Given some more time, Chihuahuas and a Great Danes will become truly distinct species.
Have you ever read any books explaining evolution? I recommend The Making of the Fittest by Sean Carroll. It explains some of the most compelling evidence that most modern scientists find quite compelling.
The Life Principle is that notion that life is a separate quantity from matter. In the sense that consciousness does not appear to arise from mere matter. The universe has enough matter in it not to mention black holes and quazars to simply discredit any notion that intelligent life morphs out of anything resembling matter. To insist on such flies in the face of science.
The “Life Principle” is commonly known as Vitalism. It’s an ancient pre-scientific theory that has been around for thousands of years but is generally rejected now like other speculative substances and causes like pholgiston, the luminiferous aether, disease caused by demons, etc.
Do you have any evidence supporting your belief in the “Life Principle” or is it a consequence of your philosophy? I tend towards Idealism for philosophical reasons, and because I’m not confident that physics can explain consciousness. But I’m not a Vitalist because there is nothing about biological functions that can’t be explained in terms of physics as far as I know.
So, I do appreciate that you are still accepting the Great Mystery as the Ultimate realization in life. (hint hint! LOL) Perhaps this is why masters of Martial arts practice mediatation. It would seem to open the door to such mystical experiences.
I am quite open to speculation about things that cannot yet be explained, but I’m quite resistant to believing those speculations if we have any way to know if they are true.
It is a joy discussing these things with you.
Richard
Hello Richard:
I am kind of confused as to why there is no “reply” line at the vottom of yur comments to me in particular…. Does that mean I should not comment further? LOL
I went ahead and copied your response to my comments below…. I really did find your comments quite interesting. I will just say that yes I do understand the evolutionary scheme quite well. Yes I have read Sean Carroll’s work and find it rather good. However, nothing I have read to date really addresses the issues that arise from the different time frames found in galactic formation Hubble Red-shift anomalies and Biological time and real earth time. No I do not think the 13 Billion year number is correct. I also do not believe in a “young earth” theory for the universe as a whole. The whole carbon dating game is a complete joke! What I do believe however is that the creation sequence and the flood story in the Bible might be some kind of code for what I see as some time keeping system for temple building or what is called “probationary time”. In other words a sequence of relational time events which would indicate some “divine” sequence which is found throuhout ALL spiritual writings. This is why I believe the Egyptians were obssessed with the after-life. They knew it to be real.
The “Gospel” as Christians call it – is nothing more than the concepts about behaviour and practices which allow the “divine” to interact with humans. The whole scheme of “salvation” imbedded in the languages of anciet cultures along with the Tower of Babal story whos strong evidence – i believe – for some “other-worldly” intelligence interacting with people. To the point that these people were scared and began to create systems of thought which was geared to address their fears. Hence the creation of the Egyptian Book of The Dead – and those types of supersitions and attempts for people to address the unknown future of the “after-life.
As to your question of do I believe in any one group of people haveing the true Gospel…. No I do not. However, I do believe there is a true system which if followed can and will lead to immortality… Jesus the Christ is NOT the saviour of the world as taught by Christians…. IHVH of the Jewish Talmud is credited with that distinction in my opinion. This model of ONE GOD is also the model found in gene sequencing. So that the connection between human DNA could have several sources – most logically we are all related through common decent. This does not answer the question of where does life come from or how does it permeate nature. By education I am a trained to understand human physiology and body functions. So I completely agree that science does tend to lean in one direction as to the origin of life being a by-product of these functions. But the mystery of how the fibers in the heart know how to beat and “sponteneously” do so is not explainable by any biological process.
You said: What do Dr. Arp’s contrary opinions have to do with evolution? Why do you find his arguments against current cosmological models compelling? Do you understand General Relativity?
I do have a basic understanding of the theory of General Relativity… The fact that the constraints of the Big Bang Module were first theorized by Dr. Arp as Dr. Hubbles assistant – and later discarded as false
by him does give reason to pause…
The problem with the evolutionary module is one of time… The universe hase to many stars galaxys and specifically glaxays connected to other galaxys which cannot fit into the time constraints of the evolutionary big-bang module. So that is the issue. No matter how the dots are strung together the basic essential evolutionary time module falls apart when trying to explain the formation of these super large structures.
That is all for now…
Namaste
Mystykal
Greetings, Richard!
First of all I’d like to say that all of your work is absolutely amazing!! It’s so beautiful and exhaustive, I’ve found myself returning again and again, night and day. I previously had difficulty envisioning myself a mathematician, though your work and the work of Vernon Jenkins have certainly changed that!
I both appreciate and admire your open-mindedness, especially given the subject at hand. I find your idea of an ‘evolved’ text very intriguing, though at the same time I have difficulty subscribing to it for a number of reasons, mainly prompted by the fact that pi, e and the Fine-Structure Constant as well as it’s inverse may be found in Genesis 1:1 when combined with Gen1:2 or John 1:1 and undoubtedly other texts that I have not yet examined for myself. This is far from the only reason, though I find it highly remarkable. Especially that the gematria of Gen1:1=the ordinal and standard values of Wisdom, a very appropriate beginning for such an awe-inspiring book.
You certainly have a far deeper understanding of Scripture than I, therefore it is not my place to question or judge your conclusions; however, there may be a third or even fourth alternative between evolution and divinity, involving in some ways elements of both yet in some ways rejecting both. It will probably seem pretty ‘out there’, though considering the entirety of the discoveries in Scripture, coupled with the surface content, I believe the truth is almost inevitably ‘pretty out there’.
First of all I think one possibility is that it could be a software, algorithm or the like: the Jews have said for a long time that there were originally no spaces. We may attach to this the fact that Hebrew is alphanumeric, and also the fact that they assert the Torah contains all creation, a notion that is close to becoming fact (the NT is also encoded). It could be said with some accuracy that the whole Bible does not contain a single letter.
One may postulate that the Old Testament is a ‘readable format’ of the software underlying what many physicists believe to be a holographic universe, where the surface content is simply a compendium of the philosophies within creation leading up to that time.
It is a text that needed to be preserved, therefore it was placed beneath a text that would ensure survival, as it spoke deeply to the people of the time. What better way to preserve a ‘file’ than to conceal it within stories that speak to the hearts of so many? Or gospels that Demand exact preservation, where the deviation of a single letter will be the end of the world? This is somewhat of a passing speculation, the idea occurred to me a few minutes ago. Of interest regarding 137, some physicists believe that they found a section of the universe which may not possess the Fine-Structure constant known to earthlings, implying either that there are variations of it and therefore it’s not a ‘constant’, or that we are in a central location designed for life in every way, from the universe’s structure to the layout of the solar system (it’s an amusing coincidence that we are the 3rd planet from the sun, not the second or fourth, the first three letters of Gen1:1 spell creation and they’re the initials of the Trinity).
ELSs are of great interest regarding the level of understanding possessed by the author(s) of the Bible, as they demonstrate a borderline fear-inspiring knowledge of future events (see: http://www.biblecodedigest.com, “Bible Code Bombshell”). Then there is the amazing degree of precision regarding it’s actual content (see: “Data Integrity Patterns in the Torah”, available as PDF through google). It has been shown in the paper just mentioned that there have been no deletions or additions since it’s original transcription and that the authors almost inevitably had a firm understanding of check-sums, a method of scanning files to ensure that it is uncorrupted: it is used in computers, not books! I believe all of these go against a ‘fumbly’ or ‘accidental’ amalgamation of Scripture, at least with the Old Testament.
Before I introduce my other very alternative idea, first consider what ‘magic’ is. Magic is generally seen as ‘illusion’, something that appears remarkable with no clear, reasonable cause, but in reality does have an explanation, albeit unseen by the spectators and known by the illusionist. The understanding of the hidden element redefines ‘magic’ as ‘knowledge’.
Magicians are often portrayed with ‘wands’, or some form of small stick; with these they allegedly moved stones, caused illness and remedy, generally altered the world around them.
What if ‘godliness’ was simply something attributed to people possessing abilities not understood by their contemporaries? Consider some of the myths: a Greek tale recounts that a man played the harp so eloquently that the trees, plants, stones and men all yielded to it’s beauty, flocking to him. There is a tale regarding the pyramids, that they were allegedly levitated into place with a musical wand or something similar. Theoretically this could be possible with the proper interaction of soundwaves, which would certainly appear divine to those of lesser technological understanding. There’s also the Coral Castle of Ed Leedskalnin. He is known to have said roughly “I found the secret of the Pyramids”.
The first documented civilization on Earth was Sumer, or Sumeria; they are the originators of Language, Art, Sculpture, Religion, Mathematics, essentially everything that separates us from the rest of Earth’s inhabitants. They had many very interesting stories about things like giants, gods etc, that often bear a somewhat striking relation to some of the allegories/historical accounts (depending on perspective) contained within the Bible. It is interesting to note that they emerged in the Tigris-Euphrates region less than 10, 000 years ago, odd considering our allegedly quite lengthy fossil history(why is our documented history so much shorter than our archaeological? It makes little sense especially given the lack of dramatic physiological changes within the past 200, 000yrs).
It is probable that all historically notable civilizations descended from Sumer, as exhibited in the various philosophies of Babylonian, Egypt and the later Hellenistic cultures.
What if the intervention alleged to have taken place in ancient times was neither God nor allegory? Let us take the two most common opinions regarding the Bible, and see if we may come to a middle ground.
On the one side there are fundamentalists, firm believers that take every word of Scripture as direct fact; they believe it was written by God. On the other side are the allegorists and the atheists/agnostics, who generally believe that the Bible was written by man. Where does that leave us?- Factoring in all of the mathematical and clairvoyant aspects, rejecting of both common positions, this leaves us with E.T.s!
Let it be said for the record that I do not necessarily subscribe whole-heartedly to either of these ideas, they are simply the speculations of a mind seeking truth. These ideas are still in their embryonic states.
Richard, I’d like to hear your thoughts on this if you could possibly find the time, though if you are unable I completely understand given the level of activity on your wonderful website.
Kind regards,
Jakob