Google Ads

Google Ads

Bible Wheel Book

Google Ads

+ Reply to Thread
Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 44
  1. #31
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    11
    Quote Originally Posted by RAM View Post
    Public would be best by far. I delight in serious reviews of my work, and there are far too few of them out there. (Almost none, actually. ) You have permission to post reviews, criticisms, synopses, or whatever you like from my work on your site, with the only condition being that you properly cite the source and notify me so I can respond, of course. Other than that, go to it! You can copy/paste, use my graphics, whatever. All in good faith, of course.
    Hi Richard,

    I have read through all the chapters that are available in the online version, but I have found there are actually only a couple chapters available. The current PDF version available online is locked. I was wondering if you had an unlocked copy or even a text copy so I can run it through my text to speech reader? The current PDF version will not allow me to do so.

    why1942

  2. #32
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Yakima, Wa
    Posts
    15,148
    Quote Originally Posted by why1942 View Post
    Hi Richard,

    I have read through all the chapters that are available in the online version, but I have found there are actually only a couple chapters available. The current PDF version available online is locked. I was wondering if you had an unlocked copy or even a text copy so I can run it through my text to speech reader? The current PDF version will not allow me to do so.

    why1942
    Actually, there are eight chapters available in html format online. Here is the link to the chapter index (also available as a dropdown menu below the icon of the book on the home page):

    http://biblewheel.com/book/chapters/index.asp

    I just checked the PDF and it seems fine.

    http://www.biblewheel.com/book/BibleWheel_Book_web.pdf

    But the print feature is locked to protect copyright since the entire book is contained in the PDF document. I am guessing this also disables the speech to text feature, though that seems odd.

    I will send you a link to a printable version in you PM in a few minutes. Let me know if that fixes it for your text to speech reader.
    • Skepticism is the antiseptic of the mind.
    • Remember why we debate. We have nothing to lose but the errors we hold. Who but a stubborn fool would hold to errors once they have been exposed?

    Check out my blog site

  3. #33
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    11
    Hi Richard,

    I received the pdf and it works fine now. I will continue on and will let you know when I'm finished. It is so far a very good read, though it is obviously the result of a great deal of research and somewhat technical. Maybe not for the general reader.

    Have you/are you in the process of getting it published by a mainstream publisher?

    why1942

  4. #34
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    11
    Hi Richard,

    I was looking over your resume on the website and wondered why you chose not to finish your PhD?

    why1942

  5. #35
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Yakima, Wa
    Posts
    15,148
    Quote Originally Posted by why1942 View Post
    Hi Richard,

    I was looking over your resume on the website and wondered why you chose not to finish your PhD?

    why1942
    I had chosen the wrong topic for a PhD dissertation. I was trying to "solve" the entire problem of Irreversibility in Quantum Physics which is an absurd goal for a PhD student because the problem is much too wide-ranging and fundamental. Most physicists don't even think there is a problem to be solved because they believe that statistical mechanics givens an adequate explanation even if it is not fully spelled out yet. But my adviser, who influenced me greatly, was into the philosophy of science and felt that the strict law of entropy (which always increased with time) was a violation of the fundamental equations of Quantum Mechanics which were reversible. So I decided to work on that problem. It was one of the worst decisions of my life. I burned myself out spinning my wheels and finally just quit. And the problems were exacerbated by a lot of personal life issues, like a divorce after a miserable three year marriage.

    So I quit school and went to live with my uncle for a few weeks in a little cabin in the Cascade mountains while trying to figure out what to do next. One day while driving down the road I saw a bicyclist and had an epiphany ~ so I bought a bike and rode down the coast from Seattle to Los Angeles ... and back. It was one of the best decisions of my life. It transformed me physically and psychologically.

    Then I found myself hanging out in Seattle wondering what to do next, and a friend mentioned he was going to the national forest in Texas for the 1988 rainbow gathering. I went with him and had some more transformative experiences. He chose to return to Seattle before I was ready to leave, so I ended up hitchhiking back to Seattle from Texas and ran into the same wonderful crazy hippies I had hung out with in the forest at a Grateful Dead concert while passing through Santa Cruz. I met some more wonderful folks and copped a ticket for the show. It was absolutely wonderful. My new friends were from Connecticut (they had flown out to the west coast for the show) so I decided to hitch back to the east coast to visit them. They introduced me to George McNiel who ran a little organic semi-communal farm and juice company so I sold basil and tomatoes and fruit juice for a year while trying to figure out what I was going to do next.

    When that gig ran its course, George gave me an old 1971 VW bus that had been sitting on his farm for a few years, and I fired it up and headed back to the west coast, stopping in Utah for the 1989 Rainbow gathering.

    And that's how my long strange trip began ... I got further and further away from my interest in Physics. Had a bunch of mystical experiences that led to the discovery of the Bible Wheel and became enthralled with that for a decade, writing the book and the website.
    • Skepticism is the antiseptic of the mind.
    • Remember why we debate. We have nothing to lose but the errors we hold. Who but a stubborn fool would hold to errors once they have been exposed?

    Check out my blog site

  6. #36
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    11
    I only ask because I started a graduate program last year, but dropped out after three classes because I felt as if I had learned nothing in my 4 years of undergraduate work (except how to cite papers and jump through hoops). Of course, I get tremendous familial pressure to go on and get an advanced degree in "something" or "anything" as a means to legitimize my life/goals/occupation. Neither one of my parents got a college education, and my siblings all went on to get several degrees - so needless to say I'm a bit of a black sheep in the family. Of course, most of them can't seem to keep a checkbook balanced to save their life - but they are "legitimate" because they have degrees and high paying jobs.

    While enrolled in my graduate program, I was also enrolled at NationsU, an unaccredited bible college in the Church of Christ tradition, simply because it interested me and wanted to get my MDiv (though I doubt I will actually use it for a pastor or church related job in the future).

    I have a tremendous interest in several subjects: biblical research, many areas in science, mathematics and history (which is what I got my undergrad in), but my K-12 education was substandard resulting in many, many gaps (especially in mathematics), rendering any serious study implausible at best.

    So I dropped out of school and now run a small business that affords me most of my daily time to re-do my secondary and undergrad education, while still pursuing my MDiv at Nations.

    I had initially intended to get my MA in History and teach as an adjunct, but the cost vs. payoff potential seems quite unbalanced. With my self-employment opportunities (that I fell backward into), I will be able to retire in 10 years and fund my own independent research (albeit with the inherent stigma of illegitimacy or "amateurism" that often accompanies those doing research outside of academia - especially in the sciences).

    In reality, having (or in the process of having) my own funding, and with the explosion of educational resources online, the only issue that I'm still wrestling with is the idea of credibility. Without being properly credentialed, any work I do will surely be marginalized. Of course, many scholars in academia today live in total obscurity their entire careers. Likewise, the areas of science that I'm most keenly drawn to are areas of fringe science (such as ID/Creationist World View applications), so whether I was considered creditable or not, as soon as any mention of criticism of evolution, your reputation is scuttled.

    So, I think I'm on the right path (for me), even though there is little to no opportunity to participate in mainstream academia if I continue down this path. This is not to say I can't publish in academic journals - there are many independent researchers/scholars - it will just depend on whether I have anything original to say. At the moment, I don't.

    Nonetheless, when I was looking over your resume, I saw that you were an ABD and was curious about why. Thank you for the background. Your life has been quite interesting.

  7. #37
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Yakima, Wa
    Posts
    15,148
    Given your desire to have folks take your research seriously, I would strongly recommend doing whatever it takes to get accreditation. The world is filled to the brim with independent nut-jobs, especially in this internet age, so your chances of being taken seriously without accreditation are essentially null. It is hard enough with accreditation since most folks know that a wing-nut can get a PhD as easily as the next person. But without accreditation it is about as likely as winning a multimillion dollar lottery.

    That's my take on it anyway.
    • Skepticism is the antiseptic of the mind.
    • Remember why we debate. We have nothing to lose but the errors we hold. Who but a stubborn fool would hold to errors once they have been exposed?

    Check out my blog site

  8. #38
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    11
    Quote Originally Posted by RAM View Post
    Given your desire to have folks take your research seriously, I would strongly recommend doing whatever it takes to get accreditation. The world is filled to the brim with independent nut-jobs, especially in this internet age, so your chances of being taken seriously without accreditation are essentially null. It is hard enough with accreditation since most folks know that a wing-nut can get a PhD as easily as the next person. But without accreditation it is about as likely as winning a multimillion dollar lottery. That's my take on it anyway.
    I agree with you that, in order to be taken seriously, I would need to get credentialed. The difficulty I'm struggling with is 1. the fact that is is so difficult even with the degrees to be taken seriously in what is considered the fringe areas anyway, and 2. what is my real reason for wanting to be taken seriously. Do I even want to be involved in the scientific/academic communities anyway, given their horrific track record of being highly close-minded to any criticism of their secular world-view.

    In my thinking, I would be better off to pursue work in the ecclesiastical community, except that it is likewise riddled with its own biases, hierarchy, etc. Sadly it seems much of Christendom today is modeled after secular Western society, especially in the US, so it becomes the same creature just a different dress.

    This leaves me with the depressing alternative of embracing the crack-pot label and just running with it. In the last few years I've drawn closer to eremitic monasticism simply because I find no place in either secular academia or Christian evangelicalism. Yet, even the desert theology I find a little unsuitable, given that I embrace technology and modernity rather than feel called to shun it. In the end I think I find myself falling into rank and file with the likes of the crack-pot, neo-monastic wanderers, what St. Benedict calls a gyratory monk. Though I do not wander from monastery to monastery (i.e. I provide for my own necessities), I do enjoy a certain level of comfort and the simple pleasures of life (i.e. food, warmth, entertainment, etc). There is opportunity for me to possibly enter a monastery once I'm finished with my business responsibilities, but I find the prospects of a nomadic life much more appealing.

    So, in the end, I'm not sure where I will land. I'm thankful that, at least tentatively, my financial needs are met and I have an opportunity to pursue my educational goals as I see fit into the foreseeable future. Likewise, if I am able to accomplish my financial objectives, I will have no concern for funding basic necessities and research requirements in the future, so I have no need for academia - except for credibility - and then I have to really question why the approval of others is so important in the first place.

  9. #39
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Yakima, Wa
    Posts
    15,148
    Quote Originally Posted by why1942 View Post
    I agree with you that, in order to be taken seriously, I would need to get credentialed. The difficulty I'm struggling with is 1. the fact that is is so difficult even with the degrees to be taken seriously in what is considered the fringe areas anyway, and 2. what is my real reason for wanting to be taken seriously. Do I even want to be involved in the scientific/academic communities anyway, given their horrific track record of being highly close-minded to any criticism of their secular world-view.

    In my thinking, I would be better off to pursue work in the ecclesiastical community, except that it is likewise riddled with its own biases, hierarchy, etc. Sadly it seems much of Christendom today is modeled after secular Western society, especially in the US, so it becomes the same creature just a different dress.

    This leaves me with the depressing alternative of embracing the crack-pot label and just running with it. In the last few years I've drawn closer to eremitic monasticism simply because I find no place in either secular academia or Christian evangelicalism. Yet, even the desert theology I find a little unsuitable, given that I embrace technology and modernity rather than feel called to shun it. In the end I think I find myself falling into rank and file with the likes of the crack-pot, neo-monastic wanderers, what St. Benedict calls a gyratory monk. Though I do not wander from monastery to monastery (i.e. I provide for my own necessities), I do enjoy a certain level of comfort and the simple pleasures of life (i.e. food, warmth, entertainment, etc). There is opportunity for me to possibly enter a monastery once I'm finished with my business responsibilities, but I find the prospects of a nomadic life much more appealing.

    So, in the end, I'm not sure where I will land. I'm thankful that, at least tentatively, my financial needs are met and I have an opportunity to pursue my educational goals as I see fit into the foreseeable future. Likewise, if I am able to accomplish my financial objectives, I will have no concern for funding basic necessities and research requirements in the future, so I have no need for academia - except for credibility - and then I have to really question why the approval of others is so important in the first place.
    Wow - we've got a lot in common!

    And you are correct that credentials won't really help much if you are working in a "fringe" area which is any subject that has been "judged and found wanting" by the academic community. For example, my brother in law is a very well known professor of the Philosophy of Science and Religion at Messiah College. He wrote a highly technical four page introduction to the Bible Wheel giving strong reasons it should be reviewed by competent scholars. He sent it to a famous Christian apologist who specializes in advanced philosophical arguments for the faith. He wrote back to my brother and rejected everything out of hand, calling it "preposterous" and saying how he couldn't believe how a professor of my brother's caliber could consider the Bible Wheel for one second. He basically mocked him for even looking at it! Talk about closed minded!

    The same thing happened to established scholar Casper Labuschange when he began reporting on the numerical structures of passages in the Tanakh. I wrote about in this post discussing the triple menorah structure of Psalm 37.

    Quote Originally Posted by RAM

    Casper J. Labuschagne: His homepage has links to various studies, most notably his online study Numerical Features of the Psalms: A Logotechnical Quantitative Structural Analysis. His highly detailed numerical analysis of Psalm 37 is found here. I own his book called Numerical Secrets of the Bible: Rediscovering the Bible Codes. In it, he has a "Personal Note" that is very enlightening as to the darkness that reigns over the minds of almost all "modern academic biblical scholars." You see, Casper Labuschagne is himself a serious academic biblical scholar. But he was caught completely unawares by his colleagues visceral and fundamentally irrational response to his studies. Here is how he put it:
    When I began to carry out my scholarly investigations into the numerical aspects of the Bible from approximately 1981 onwards, I was not sufficiently aware of the recent upsurge in kabbalistic mathematical exercises, number speculations, and other types of numerological practices and number juggling. Neither did I realize how deeply sceptical the biblical scholarly world was about numerical matters in general. What I could not sense either, was the danger of be associated with such unscholarly practices and having my work rejected out of hand. With hindsight, one of th mistakes I made in the beginning was that I failed to demarcate my numerical research at the outset clearly from these dubious numerological activities. It was only ten years later, in the Dutch version of the present book, that I dissociated myself explicitly from such practices. It is hard to say where that would have changed the course of events. [RAM: No, it is not hard to say at all. Take my word for it Casper, it would not have helped one iota! The academic rejection is not based on reason, evidence, or logic. It is nothing but a visceral and irrational rejection of the Bible as the Word of God.]

    What I did not realize and could not possible foresee, was the plain fact that my embarking on numerical research would put my scholarly reputation at risk and that I would be sidetracked from the inner circle of serious biblical scholarship. Knowing what happened to the Austrian orientalist and biblical scholar Claus Schedl during the sixties and seventies, whose numerical investigations were greeted with ridicule on the part of colleagues and summarily rejected, I was naively confident that the evidence I presented would enjoy favorable acceptance. However, I was faced with a very different reality from the outset by the totally unexpected negative reaction by two British scholars, P. R. Davies and D. M. Gunn, to my presentation of the numerical patterns of the Divine Speech Formulas in the Pentateuch in 1982.

    I was sobered up particularly by the adverses response on the art of the majority of my colleagues to the two papers I read in the summer of 1983. ... In Louvain I was rather rudely reproached by the chairman of the session: "Do you want to lead us back to the Kabbalah?" After the lecture, only one Deuteronomy scholar, Duane Christensen [see above], approached me to discuss my paper. Another colleague shook my hand saying: "Thanks for the lesson in mathematics, but I don't believe you!"

    During my lecture in Salamanca, my wife and son, who were in the audience, counted no less than eleven attendants at the session who left the hall rather demonstratively. Some of them crumpled up my handouts and threw them on the floor [RAM: like snotty adolescents, I might add!] The tone of the discussion following the presentation of the paper was set by a colleague who expressed his disappointment that a reputed scholar could get himself involved in such futile activities. My work was greeted with such disbelief and contempt [RAM: Yep! That's the root problem, alright!] that I began to realize that it was destined to be ridiculed and dismissed.

    After the session, I found myselfcompletely alone, standing there on the square, out of earshot surrounded by groups of gesticulating colleagues obviously discussing the problem of Labuschagne. Nobody wanted to talk to me or to be seen in my company. There was one exception: the next day, during an excursion it Avila, a Jewish scholar laid his hand gently upon my arm and whispered the following words, which I would cherish during the years to come: "The ways of the Almighty are wonderful. To think that, after goys like Wellhausen and his followers had dissected the Torah, He once again uses a goy to open our eyes to its unity."

    It was in Salamanca that I fathomed the significance of the word outcast, and during the years that followed, I would also perceive what it means to he held up as an object of ridicule behind one's back. However, there was no doubt in my mind that if this was the price I had to pay for a scholarly discovery I believed in and considered significant, I was fully prepared to pay dearly. Any alternative would mean sacrificing my scholarly conscience. Therefore, despite the expectation among some of my colleagues that I would come to my senses and stop such activities, I confidently persisted in pursuing my numerical research, encouraged by what I discovered all along.

    What I am presenting in this book is only a fraction of my discoveries, and merely the tip of the iceberg of undetected secrets of the biblical text. I have no illusions about any immediate effect my pleas may have on biblical scholars, but I do have confidence in the convincing power of truth on the basis of the massive amount of evidence i hereby lay on their desks.
    As you can see, the academic community is none too friendly to information that doesn't fit it's paradigm, regardless of the supporting evidence. Real breakthroughs typically go through three stages:

    1) They are ignored.

    2) They are mocked.

    3) They are accepted as self-evident.

    The Bible Wheel has gone through the first two stages.

    Great chatting,

    Richard
    • Skepticism is the antiseptic of the mind.
    • Remember why we debate. We have nothing to lose but the errors we hold. Who but a stubborn fool would hold to errors once they have been exposed?

    Check out my blog site

  10. #40
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    11
    Quote Originally Posted by RAM View Post
    Wow - we've got a lot in common!
    I'm beginning to thinks so....

    I also have Casper Labuschange's book, "Numerical Secrets of the Bible". I was not shocked when I read about the reaction in the Preface, but I always struggle to understand academia's ability to be "willingly ignorant" of so many verifiable issues.

    Also, I would be very interested in reading your brother-in-law's introduction to the Bible Wheel. Is it available somewhere online?

    why1942

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may edit your posts
  •