Google Ads

Google Ads

Bible Wheel Book

Google Ads

+ Reply to Thread
Page 16 of 33 FirstFirst ... 612131415161718192026 ... LastLast
Results 151 to 160 of 322
  1. #151
    Hi Richard & Bill & anyone else who happens upon this thread I just signed up today.

    It's a fascinating read though i must admit much of it goes over my head ( i am not very good with numbers or probabilities or any of that stuff) I hope you don't mind me saying Bill but i think you might be over thinking things a bit here - Seriously please don't take any offence but it seems to be a very deep & somewhat obscure code - i think everything is pretty much more out in the open now - it's almost as if something is revelling in the revealing which will eventually (unless perhaps we can hack the code) become the new re-veiling / reviling - no code needed, unless it's a codex i suspect that the code to be de cyphered, if there is such a thing, is within our living DNA the living animated wyrd, a sort of quantum cryptography if u like ... anyway it struck me the other day that perhaps for the first time in History RELIGION, SCIENCE & POLITICS all kind of agree that entropy requires a mess-higher, which would imply that whether we be Jew, Christian or Muslim, Buddhist, Hindu or Bahia, whether atheist or a theist, agnostic or a Gnostic we are all human beings & in a sense we are all DECIBELS OF THE MESS-HIGHER - ever increasingly complexity etc. this sentence intrigues me : our descendants will continue their dissent no matter how decent they be.

    i don't know about probabilities but the chance that these linguistic "oddities" exist & are simply down to chance seem to my admittedly uneducated brain somewhat remote so not really sure what's going on there - dunno what you think - Anyway, i hope you don't mind my intrusion, please don't take offence as i am simply just a simple fellow putting in my two penneth worth in so to speak all the best to u both

  2. #152
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    205
    Quote Originally Posted by Richard Amiel McGough View Post
    Yes, it is an absurdity. That was my point! I used a classic logical argument to refute your theory. It's called a Reductio ad Absurdum. I used YOUR METHODS to show that they lead to absurdity and so cannot be true or trusted.
    The absurdity was in L67's question to me asking how I could prove God hadn't encoded your message: and the answer is that a message saying gematria wasn't real, encoded using gematria, would be self-refuting. Proof by reductio ad absurdum, with which I'm quite familiar.

    Reductio ad absurdum (proof by contradiction) arguments show that statements when taken to their logical conclusion lead to absurdities. You are misapplying it here though. L67 asked me how I could prove your code isn't real. That was easy. You on the other hand are not proving my code isn't real. You are merely inventing possible alternative phrases that could be slotted in. The most you could ever prove - and you are a long, long way from that - is that there is a chance the code might not be real. I knew that from the start, though. All the way along I have said that the code cannot be proven in the absolute sense of a mathematical proof. Nothing is provable except in mathematics and logic, and even the some propositions are 'undecideable'. You won't get certainty this side of the grave.

    The code is recognised to be real because of its message, which will resonate with those who are ready for it. There will always be room for doubt, so that those who turn their backs on God have the freedom to reject it. If the code were proven to be real, they would not have that freedom. It is there to bolster the faith of those who already believe or to help convince those who are ready to take the leap of faith. Of course, it also contains a shocking, radical, inspiring message about our current age.

    The code is like a crossword puzzle, where for a while you can fool yourself you have the clues right, when in fact you don't, because they don't link up to others: you might find one or two links but then it all falls apart. I already showed that with your last attempt at a pseudo-encoding, where the phrases showed very few of the characteristics of the real ones.

    As for your next attempt . . .

  3. #153
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    205
    Quote Originally Posted by Richard Amiel McGough View Post
    You would do well to choose your principles as carefully as your words. Your PRINCIPLES are entirely inconsistent. You change them whenever you need to rationalize why one pattern doesn't follow the same principles as some other pattern. They cannot be consistent because your "codes" are not consistent. Your assertion that they are all "interlocking is directly contradicted by the fact that they are not based on any consistent set of principles. In essence, you just make up whatever you want after the fact and the say "God did it." Nothing could be more absurd.
    The code is based on a unique two-system encoding-decoding method that was taught to me by the Key. It also, however, uses reduced values and combined values (which are tentative, so I don't make a huge deal out of them). Does that make it inconsistent? No, it just means that more information can be packed in. The Encoder is creative.

    The four ark encodings do not use the definite article and are therefore internally consistent. Does that mean the definite article cannot be used elsewhere? No! It has been, as you've gleefully pointed out. This isn't inconsistency though, it's creativity, a means of packing in as much information as possible. It increases the probability of random hits, yes, but also increases the information content. It's a trade-off, a 'best-fit' code.

    Information has been encoded by different methods. Gematria, ELS codes, letter counts, verse counts, encodings at the word level, verse level and even letter level at times, and encodings of geometric figures (which are less ambiguous than phrases). Does that make it inconsistent? No! They are all different ways of packing in encoded material. In fact they help validate the code because some of them are independent of the others, yet they produce confluences of meaningfully-related patterns

    From the start you have demanded that the code conform to your expectations of it, rather than find out what it is actually saying and how it says it, jumping to conclusions about it all the time. I say that the ark encodings are based only on phrases found exclusively within the NIV, and you assume that the entire code must be like that. It isn't. I never said it was - just the ark encodings and some others. When the code uses biblical phrases, only those from the NIV are used, but that doesn't mean that the code is restricted to the Bible itself. Its purpose would be defeated then. And incidentally, the code was completed in 1984 yet it encodes future events (seen from 1984). The intelligence that created code exists outside of time.

    Showing that alternative phrases may be found beginning at Genesis 1 does not debunk the code. It merely shows that the code itself cannot be proven, which I've always said myself. Most of the code is inherently vulnerable to that kind of attack, because of the nature of gematria. That is one reason I wanted to discuss the geometry encoded there, since it is less ambiguous than English phrases and there are almost no opportunities for substituting alternative figures. The geometry of G-triangles underpins the Garden and can only be dismissed (again it's not certain) on probabilistic grounds - but you can only cry 'coincidence' for so long. I summarise these figures at the start of this page.

    Quote Originally Posted by Richard Amiel McGough View Post
    The Bible speaks strongly against people who do not follow consistent principles. It warns about how people delude themselves with ever changing doctrines (principles). For example:

    Eph 4:14 Then we will no longer be infants, tossed back and forth by the waves, and blown here and there by every wind of teaching and by the cunning and craftiness of people in their deceitful scheming.
    Ever-changing doctrines? That would be you then, Richard. For ten years or more you proclaimed the Biblewheel as "the divine seal and capstone of God's word", in your artwork placing it between the cherubim on the ark, as if it were the Glory itself. You can't promote anything more assertively than that. Then you decided that it was an idol, a golden calf, and you 'debunked' it, completely trashing that which you had so confidently proclaimed to be the Truth. Now you equally confidently proclaim it was a delusion and that you are now 'awake'. But can someone who was so wrong to begin with ever be trusted? Where was the consistency of your principles? Which doctrines do you hold to now? What happened to yesterday's ideas? All you have ever proven was that you are NOT fit to judge what is a code and what is not a code, because you were either deluded then, and (unconsciously) relying on 'cunning and craftiness', or you are deluded now and relying on 'cunning and craftiness'. One thing you are not is consistent.

    Quote Originally Posted by Richard Amiel McGough View Post
    I'm pretty sure you are not deliberately using "cunning and craftiness" but your codes strike me as extremely "deceitful scheming" because you have deceived yourself, and cannot state, let alone adhere to, a coherent consistent set of principles that define your "codes".
    I follow the principles of the code as I understand them. You mischaracterise them as inconsistent, when in fact you are the one who misunderstands them. I'll list the principles tomorrow so there is no doubt. But be clear that we are dealing with a creative intelligence here. You will not find encoding by rote, any more than a great musician plays the same piece of music the same way every time. That would be the mark of a workman, not an artist.

    Quote Originally Posted by Richard Amiel McGough View Post
    Now tell me this ... is it a "mere coincidence" that this verse INTEGRATES with my code that shows numerology is false? Look at this!

    Attachment 1439

    Haven't had enough? What are the chances that the VERSE NUMBERS would also be found in the grid, starting with the first word? We have the identity:

    BOOK OF EPHESIANS FOUR FOURTEEN = 1728 = Word string from word 1 to word 36!!!

    Attachment 1440

    What will it take for you to see the truth Bill?

    Your code has been debunked.
    Let's apply the same test we did earlier to your last effort, and see if it passes muster this time.

    Does it proceed from the first words of the NIV? YES.
    Was it decoded in the same way? YES
    Is each phrase internally consistent? YES
    Are the phrases/word consistent with each other? NO. One of them is part of a verse with no real connection to your gematria statements. Neither are gematria and numerology considered to be the same by many people.
    Do the phrases make a meaningful statement? NO. Together, they do NOT make a meaningful statement. Three are related and they are open ended anyway. The ark encodings state all the items in the Most Holy Place associated with the Day of Atonement.
    Are they of profound religious significance? NO
    Are they biblical phrases? NO
    Are they found only in the NIV Bible? NO, simply because they are not found in any bible.
    Are they supported by other independent 'codes' (such as ELS codes)? That remains to be seen.
    Do they interlock with similar codes in the same location to give larger patterns of meaning? Again, that remains to be seen. You misunderstood what I meant by interlocking. All you did was show another word string. Look again at how 'atonement cover' interlocks with the Signature of Christ.
    Do they make any kind of pattern, such as the 14-24-34 pattern or the 6-6-6-6 pattern of the Signature of Christ? NO.

    Thi isn't even close. Why not give up and we can work on that test method I've asked you about several times? That is a far better method of testing the reality of the code, because it will show if random numbers show the same percentage of overlaps as I found in Genesis.

    Again, the code is NOT debunked.

  4. #154
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    205

    The Consistency of the Code

    I promised I would lay down the basic rules by which the New Bible Code was apparently constructed, so it's time to do just that.

    The code is based on two schemes of alphabetic numeration which were given to me by means of a Key. This key showed me that numbers are encoded as ordinal values and decoded as standard values. The numbers are found in the text of the NIV Bible (1984), within the occasional Hebrew and Greek word, and within two recent events: the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001 and the funeral of Pope John Paul II. 9/11 was a huge, multisymbolic event, prophesied and alluded to within the Bible from beginning to end and a kind of focal point in space and time.

    So the Key opens up the text of the NIV Bible but also decodes 9/11 and the funeral of Pope John Paul II. Here's an example, using the two-system Key. 9/11 took place 254 days into the third Millennium. The funeral took place 1559 days into the third Millennium.

    Our Lord Jesus Christ (o) = 254
    Our Lord Jesus Christ (s) = 1559

    In other words both events are linked to Jesus Christ, through the ordinal and standard value systems. The code here is also using the end of the second Millennium, 31/12/00, as a reference point. I was shown myself that this is the most important one and many of the events in my own life were linked to it to impress this upon me.

    The code also utilises the reduced value system and another system, the sum of the first three, for supplimentary information. However, it can stand on its own without them and I seldom mention them. Note that the standard, ordinal and reduced systems are commonly used in Hebrew gematria and the standard value itself is simply the original sheme of alphabetic numeration by which Hebrew characters doubled as numbers.

    Other features of the NIV Bible are utilised by the code, such as verse, chapter and book counts and chapter and verse indicators. The code creatively utilises these numbers to stitch a tapestry of meaning. Here is an example. In Genesis Genealogies I tabulate the genealogical lists given in Genesis 5 and 11, showing the lifespans of Adam and his progeny through to Noah then again from Shem through to Terah. There is a coda to the list that runs through Genesis, giving the lifespans of Abraham Isaac, Jacob and Joseph and it ends at the very end of the book. Here is the table.

    Name:  Table 9.6b.jpg
Views: 39
Size:  150.7 KB

    If you look at the 22nd row you will see that the lifespan of Abraham is given in the 666th chapter and the Lifespan of Joseph the 1529th chapter. The running total of the numbers to these points are 20391 and 20888. These numbers can all be linked to the Second Coming through the standard value system:

    The Lord's Coming (s) = 666
    Second Coming (s) = 391
    Jesus Christ + The Second Coming (s) = 1529
    The Lord's Second Coming (s) = 888

    391 and 888 are also the standard values in Hebrew and Greek of Yehushua and Ihsous. The '0' in 20391 and 20888 is a spacer between the 2 and the 391/888. '2' has obvious meaning. 20888 is also a multiple of 373 (Logos ).

    Another example features those two numbers 391 and 888 again. The 888th chapter in the Bible is Amos 9. Amos has 9 chapters and sits between Joel, with three chapters and Obadiah, with a single chapter, giving 391. So here we have 888 crossing 391. Why is there a cross at this precise location? Here is how the chapter opens.

    'I saw the Lord standing by the altar, and he said "Strike the tops of the pillars so that the thresholds shake. Bring them down upon the heads of the people; those who are left I will kill with the sword. Not one will get away, none will escape."' (Amos 9.1, NIV)

    This is a prophecy of 9/11, marked by what I call the Sign of the Cross.

    Joel, Amos and Obadiah all strongly feature one theme: the Day of the Lord. The only other two minor prophets with this focus are Zephaniah and Malachi, both removed from these three books. In fact of the eighteen mentions of the phrase day of the Lord' in the Old Testament fully nine are found just in these three books. Amos is often known as 'the prophet of Doom'. So in meaning, chapter numbers and, I should add, encoded numbers in the text, 9/11 is identified with the Jewish concept of the Day of the Lord, a day when God's wrath is poured out among His people.

    You can see that the code utilises various methods to bring its apocalyptic message to us. I intended to go into more detail about its workings but duty calls. This is enough for readers to see that one simple, rote method of encoding could never have acheived these confluences of thematically related numbers: the code is the product of a creative Intelligence.
    Last edited by thebluetriangle; 04-18-2017 at 01:12 AM.

  5. #155
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    661
    Quote Originally Posted by thebluetriangle View Post

    Another example features those two numbers 391 and 888 again. The 888th chapter in the Bible is Amos 9. Amos has 9 chapters and sits between Joel, with three chapters and Obadiah, with a single chapter, giving 391. So here we have 888 crossing 391. Why is there a cross at this precise location? Here is how the chapter opens.

    'I saw the Lord standing by the altar, and he said "Strike the tops of the pillars so that the thresholds shake. Bring them down upon the heads of the people; those who are left I will kill with the sword. Not one will get away, none will escape."' (Amos 9.1, NIV)

    This is a prophecy of 9/11, marked by what I call the Sign of the Cross.

    Joel, Amos and Obadiah all strongly feature one theme: the Day of the Lord. The only other two minor prophets with this focus are Zephaniah and Malachi, both removed from these three books. In fact of the eighteen mentions of the phrase day of the Lord' in the Old Testament fully nine are found just in these three books. Amos is often known as 'the prophet of Doom'. So in meaning, chapter numbers and, I should add, encoded numbers in the text, 9/11 is identified with the Jewish concept of the Day of the Lord, a day when God's wrath is poured out among His people.
    This is totally WRONG! Amos 9 has NOTHING to do with 9/11. You falsely attributed that verse out of context to suit your desires to create a code to your liking. Amos 9 is about the coming destruction on Israel as well as the restoration of Israel. There are many clues that prove this is true.

    Let's look at this in context.

    9 I saw the Lord standing upon the altar: and he said, Smite the lintel of the door, that the posts may shake: and cut them in the head, all of them; and I will slay the last of them with the sword: he that fleeth of them shall not flee away, and he that escapeth of them shall not be delivered.

    2 Though they dig into hell, thence shall mine hand take them; though they climb up to heaven, thence will I bring them down:

    3 And though they hide themselves in the top of Carmel, I will search and take them out thence; and though they be hid from my sight in the bottom of the sea, thence will I command the serpent, and he shall bite them:

    4 And though they go into captivity before their enemies, thence will I command the sword, and it shall slay them: and I will set mine eyes upon them for evil, and not for good.

    5 And the Lord God of hosts is he that toucheth the land, and it shall melt, and all that dwell therein shall mourn: and it shall rise up wholly like a flood; and shall be drowned, as by the flood of Egypt.

    6 It is he that buildeth his stories in the heaven, and hath founded his troop in the earth; he that calleth for the waters of the sea, and poureth them out upon the face of the earth: The Lord is his name.

    7 Are ye not as children of the Ethiopians unto me, O children of Israel? saith the Lord. Have not I brought up Israel out of the land of Egypt? and the Philistines from Caphtor, and the Syrians from Kir?

    8 Behold, the eyes of the Lord God are upon the sinful kingdom, and I will destroy it from off the face of the earth; saving that I will not utterly destroy the house of Jacob, saith the Lord.

    9 For, lo, I will command, and I will sift the house of Israel among all nations, like as corn is sifted in a sieve, yet shall not the least grain fall upon the earth.

    10 All the sinners of my people shall die by the sword, which say, The evil shall not overtake nor prevent us.

    11 In that day will I raise up the tabernacle of David that is fallen, and close up the breaches thereof; and I will raise up his ruins, and I will build it as in the days of old:

    12 That they may possess the remnant of Edom, and of all the heathen, which are called by my name, saith the Lord that doeth this.

    13 Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, that the plowman shall overtake the reaper, and the treader of grapes him that soweth seed; and the mountains shall drop sweet wine, and all the hills shall melt.

    14 And I will bring again the captivity of my people of Israel, and they shall build the waste cities, and inhabit them; and they shall plant vineyards, and drink the wine thereof; they shall also make gardens, and eat the fruit of them.

    15 And I will plant them upon their land, and they shall no more be pulled up out of their land which I have given them, saith the Lord thy God.



    It doesn't get any clearer than that. They hid themselves of top of Mt. Carmel. Mt. Carmel is a mountain in Israel. The whole context of Amos is about the destruction of Israel and the restoration of Israel. That's a demonstrable FACT! There is no 9/11 prophecy predicted here. You have deceived yourself. Your codes are meaningless.
    When the power of love overcomes the love of power, the world will know peace - Jimi Hendrix


  6. #156
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    205
    Quote Originally Posted by Richard Amiel McGough View Post
    I do not "assume" anything but what you have said. I am following your lead. YOU declare that something is "encoded" if it fits a pattern you like, but when I follow your logic and find something that should, by the same logic, be encoded but is not, you complain and say that there is no way anyone could ever say what should or should not be encoded. Therefore, you destroy your own testimony, because if I can't say what should be encoded, neither can you. Who are you to say that your "codes" are real? What if you are wrong? Who made you the authority of what is or is not encoded?

    You have exalted yourself above the throne of God, declaring your word to be God's Word.
    I know the code is real for other reasons, some of which I've already explained to you. I'm trying to explain the code to you too, but you aren't following very well - and it's your own assumptions that are the problem. This is why a beginner can often see what an expert misses. I was chosen because I knew virtually nothing about the Bible. I was only just becoming interested in it and the Christian faith, although I was interested in spirituality. But I knew enough to follow orders, and that's the front I was led to serve at. Having lived with it for the past fifteen years, I now know the Bible to be the greatest book ever written. It's inspired, from the first word to the last - literally! That doesn't mean that everything in it is literaly true, but that the spirit of God has been hovering over the scribes, editors (yes, it was edited many times) and translators to place in it exactly what He wanted placed there and in the versions He wanted it placed within.

    Quote Originally Posted by Richard Amiel McGough View Post
    It makes no sense at all because it is totally incoherent. I have shown this and you made up irrational rationalizations about why you can use an article here but not there, and why you must use biblical phrases here but not there. Your "codes" are blatantly inconsistent and irrational.
    All I ever said was that the ark encodings were all without the definite article, which increased the probability that they were real codes. I never said that the article wasn't use elsewhere. There is one code in fact that I like that encodes two phrases announcing the second coming, one with and one without the definite article. I'd rather it had been one way or the other, but it's still a beautiful piece of code. It also uses alternative phrases for 'coming' (all the words are found in the NIV though).

    In fact I found it because I'd already found JESUS/SECOND COMING and THE LORD/SECOND COMING over the first and last eighteen words of the NIV Bible, so I reasoned the two middle verses of the Bible might also be encoded that way. And they were - and more!

    Here is this central, symmetrical little group of codes.

    Name:  Psalm 102 Table.jpg
Views: 37
Size:  63.9 KB

    Each encoding proceeds from the first and last word, reflecting the Bible as a whole, and runs for eighteen words. Note that in the very centre of the Bible by verse we have 'Jesus Christ'! To be symmetrical with the other two it had to be an odd number, since there are an odd number of words, so it runs over 19 words. The two verses are positive too, in a chapter that is generally gloomy. And don't forget the profound meaning in these verses, from a psalm that Hebrews 1 tells us is a prophecy.

    iThis verse declares in tones of thunder "when" the Lord will appear in glory (Psalms 102:15) and "when" all the other wonderful things of this passage shall happen. That time shall be when the peoples (the Gentiles) are gathered together unto the Lord; and the kingdoms of the earth, not Israel alone, shall serve Jehovah. Only the current dispensation of the Grace of God in Christ qualifies as "that time."'(from this site)

    Quote Originally Posted by Richard Amiel McGough View Post
    The Hebrew is NOT "Adam Tselem" but rather "Adam b'tselmenu". Your Hebrew transliteration is incorrect.
    That's true, but I took it from your own website. I'm still a little unpracticed at this kind of transliteration, so I just put the transliteration you'd given here. Thanks for pointing it out though. I'll change it.

    Quote Originally Posted by Richard Amiel McGough View Post
    And yes, Messiah in English sums to 263, but we are not talking about any old messiah, but rather THE MESSIAH (the same logic you used to justify your use of "THE serpent" rather than "serpent") and that does NOT match. So again, we see you MANIPULATING THE NUMBERS to force fit the pattern you want, which is the original sin of all numerology.
    The word 'Messiah' in the NIV Bible refers to one man.

    "and said, ?Prophesy to us, Messiah. Who hit you?" (Matt. 26.68

    The word 'serpent' refers to a whole lot of things that slither.

    "Do not rejoice, all you Philistines, that the rod that struck you is broken; from the root of that snake will spring up a viper, its fruit will be a darting, venomous serpent." (Isa. 14.29)

    It's perfectly logical.

    'The Serpent' cuts out some of the ambiguity, although it refers to a snake too in another verse. It's clear though that in Genesis 3 'the serpent' is a reference to Satan. Anyway what makes you think 'the Messiah' isn't there?

    Quote Originally Posted by Richard Amiel McGough View Post
    No one with any intelligence would accept such blatantly cooked numbers. Your "logic" is radically inconsistent and illogical.
    It's not my logic, its my interpretation of the code, which took me long enough to get right and still isn't perfect. What you don't like is that the code doesn't follow your logic. I went through that too, but when I laid aside my expectations and assumptions, I found something far better than my wildest speculations.
    Last edited by thebluetriangle; 04-18-2017 at 10:44 AM.

  7. #157
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    205
    Quote Originally Posted by Richard Amiel McGough View Post
    If God is such a great encoder, why did he FAIL to encode "God" (71) or "Lord God" (255) in the word strings? You are picking and choosing incoherent bits and pieces that make no coherent pattern.
    What makes you think God wanted to encode His name here - in addition to the encodings of 'God' that are already present, that is, two of which you've already been shown? Why do you think it should be more? If I showed you ten, would you ask why there weren't twelve?

  8. #158
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    205
    Quote Originally Posted by Richard Amiel McGough View Post
    What exactly is the test you are proposing? It's self-evident that there will be lots of overlaps when you compress 3764 numbers into 83 columns. Why would anyone think any would try to encode messages that way? How exactly are we supposed to discern between the "encoded" messages and random chance? You have NEVER been able to answer this question. I've been asking it since the beginning and you have NEVER answered.

    So here is the question you need to answer:

    How are we supposed to discern between CHANCE vs. DESIGN in your "codes"?

    You have NEVER answered this.

    You need to answer this question.
    Using random pairs of numbers, the test would tell us what percentage of them would overlap in the Garden (Genesis 1.1-5). (It might also be interesting to take a random text, say a novel and try it with that, because if the text of Genesis is highly encrypoted that might affect its numerical properties.)

    If we then compare it with the encodings I actually found, ie, the double witnessed encodings of God's creations on each of the six creation days, or the double witnessed ark encodings, all taken from the first sciptural mentions of each concept, then we can see how unlikely or not these are.

    A refinement would be to take random nouns in Genesis 1, say chosen by someone not familiar with the code or the Bible, find their first instance, find the Hebrew word and the NIV translation and try those against random numbers.

    I took the first instance of each concept every time, which should make no difference to whether or not it is found in the Garden, assuming that it is not encoded. If the first instances of some concepts are encoded then it should make all the difference in the world, and I would expect more hits than chance.

    You ask me how to discern between chance and design. That is one way, by experiment. If there is no difference there is no design, because it is the hits that I am saying are the design.

  9. #159
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    205
    Quote Originally Posted by L67 View Post
    This is totally WRONG! Amos 9 has NOTHING to do with 9/11. You falsely attributed that verse out of context to suit your desires to create a code to your liking. Amos 9 is about the coming destruction on Israel as well as the restoration of Israel. There are many clues that prove this is true.

    Let's look at this in context.

    9 I saw the Lord standing upon the altar: and he said, Smite the lintel of the door, that the posts may shake: and cut them in the head, all of them; and I will slay the last of them with the sword: he that fleeth of them shall not flee away, and he that escapeth of them shall not be delivered.

    2 Though they dig into hell, thence shall mine hand take them; though they climb up to heaven, thence will I bring them down:

    3 And though they hide themselves in the top of Carmel, I will search and take them out thence; and though they be hid from my sight in the bottom of the sea, thence will I command the serpent, and he shall bite them:

    4 And though they go into captivity before their enemies, thence will I command the sword, and it shall slay them: and I will set mine eyes upon them for evil, and not for good.

    5 And the Lord God of hosts is he that toucheth the land, and it shall melt, and all that dwell therein shall mourn: and it shall rise up wholly like a flood; and shall be drowned, as by the flood of Egypt.

    6 It is he that buildeth his stories in the heaven, and hath founded his troop in the earth; he that calleth for the waters of the sea, and poureth them out upon the face of the earth: The Lord is his name.

    7 Are ye not as children of the Ethiopians unto me, O children of Israel? saith the Lord. Have not I brought up Israel out of the land of Egypt? and the Philistines from Caphtor, and the Syrians from Kir?

    8 Behold, the eyes of the Lord God are upon the sinful kingdom, and I will destroy it from off the face of the earth; saving that I will not utterly destroy the house of Jacob, saith the Lord.

    9 For, lo, I will command, and I will sift the house of Israel among all nations, like as corn is sifted in a sieve, yet shall not the least grain fall upon the earth.

    10 All the sinners of my people shall die by the sword, which say, The evil shall not overtake nor prevent us.

    11 In that day will I raise up the tabernacle of David that is fallen, and close up the breaches thereof; and I will raise up his ruins, and I will build it as in the days of old:

    12 That they may possess the remnant of Edom, and of all the heathen, which are called by my name, saith the Lord that doeth this.

    13 Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, that the plowman shall overtake the reaper, and the treader of grapes him that soweth seed; and the mountains shall drop sweet wine, and all the hills shall melt.

    14 And I will bring again the captivity of my people of Israel, and they shall build the waste cities, and inhabit them; and they shall plant vineyards, and drink the wine thereof; they shall also make gardens, and eat the fruit of them.

    15 And I will plant them upon their land, and they shall no more be pulled up out of their land which I have given them, saith the Lord thy God.



    It doesn't get any clearer than that. They hid themselves of top of Mt. Carmel. Mt. Carmel is a mountain in Israel. The whole context of Amos is about the destruction of Israel and the restoration of Israel. That's a demonstrable FACT! There is no 9/11 prophecy predicted here. You have deceived yourself. Your codes are meaningless.
    You have this the wrong way round, I'm afraid. When I found this crossing of 391 (chapters in Joel, Amos and Obadiah) with 888 (the positional value of Amos 9) I knew little about Amos. It was the code itself that directed me to this chapter. Only then did I look at it and see that it resonated with 9/11. The encoded numbers I found supported it.

    Many verses, prophecies, parables, etc, fit the pattern of 9/11. Here are a few for you:

    1. Genesis 10.19 is the first verse to introduce the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah, destroyed by the Lord because they had given themselves over to sin.

    2. The story of Sodom and Gomorrah is continued in Genesis 19, so the two chapters in which they are mentioned are 10 and 19, suggesting 9/11 again.

    3. The story of the tower of Babel, which God prevented man from building, is told over the first 9 verses of Genesis 11.

    4. In the early chapters of Exodus God shows his power to the Egyptians by having Moses and Aaron defeat the Pharaoh's magicians. In Exodus 9.11 we are told that Pharaoh's magicians cannot stand before Moses and Aaron after being covered in boils. In the NIV, the ordinal value of this verse is 957 (11 x 87).

    5. 1 Samuel 17 tells the story of David felling Goliath with a single slingshot. The twin towers were a type of Goliath: large and powerful but an enemy of God's people. Chapter 17 is the Bible's 253rd (11 x 23). The chapter/verse where David fires the fatal slingshot is 17.49 (11 x 159).

    6. Isaiah 30.25 warns of a ' ... day of great slaughter, when the towers fall ...' 3025 is 11 x 11 x 5 x 5. [1]

    7. In Jeremiah 9.11 the Lord threatens the destruction of Jerusalem and other towns. In the NIV, the ordinal value of this verse is 1122 (11 x 102).

    8. Zephaniah 1.16 prophesies an attack on the 'fortified cities' and the 'corner towers' of Jerusalem. In the NIV, the ordinal value of this verse is 847 (11 x 11 x 7).

    9. Mark 11 describes Jesus' triumphal entry into Jerusalem. In Mark 11.20 the fig tree that Jesus cursed is found withered. The ordinal value of the verse is 803 (11 x 73). Mark 11 is the Bible's 968th chapter (11 x 11 x 8).

    10. In Revelation 20.9, fire from heaven comes down and destroys Satan and his followers, who had surrounded the camp of God's people. The ordinal value of this verse is 1342 (11 x 122). 209 is 11 x 19.

    This is a small sample of verses where the events fit the pattern of 9/11. All are marked with either 11 or 9 and 11. In biblical numerics 9 means endings, finality, judgment, fruits and suffering. 11 means disorder, disintegration and imperfection. So 9/11 itself implies God's judgment on an imperfect system. It's ending. It's just desserts.

  10. #160
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Yakima, Wa
    Posts
    14,739
    Quote Originally Posted by thebluetriangle View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Richard Amiel McGough
    What exactly is the test you are proposing? It's self-evident that there will be lots of overlaps when you compress 3764 numbers into 83 columns. Why would anyone think any would try to encode messages that way? How exactly are we supposed to discern between the "encoded" messages and random chance? You have NEVER been able to answer this question. I've been asking it since the beginning and you have NEVER answered.

    So here is the question you need to answer:

    How are we supposed to discern between CHANCE vs. DESIGN in your "codes"?

    You have NEVER answered this.

    You need to answer this question.
    Using random pairs of numbers, the test would tell us what percentage of them would overlap in the Garden (Genesis 1.1-5). (It might also be interesting to take a random text, say a novel and try it with that, because if the text of Genesis is highly encrypoted that might affect its numerical properties.)

    If we then compare it with the encodings I actually found, ie, the double witnessed encodings of God's creations on each of the six creation days, or the double witnessed ark encodings, all taken from the first sciptural mentions of each concept, then we can see how unlikely or not these are.

    A refinement would be to take random nouns in Genesis 1, say chosen by someone not familiar with the code or the Bible, find their first instance, find the Hebrew word and the NIV translation and try those against random numbers.

    I took the first instance of each concept every time, which should make no difference to whether or not it is found in the Garden, assuming that it is not encoded. If the first instances of some concepts are encoded then it should make all the difference in the world, and I would expect more hits than chance.

    You ask me how to discern between chance and design. That is one way, by experiment. If there is no difference there is no design, because it is the hits that I am saying are the design.
    Hey there Bill,

    Sorry for the slow response. I was out of state on vacation for most of the last two weeks. Had a great time driving down the Pacific coast, riding my bike around Seattle and San Francisco, and going to a convention put on by MAPS (the Multidisciplinary Association for Psychedelic Studies). It was awesome.

    Now as for the test you suggest - there are a few problems. First, your emphasis on "probability" is fundamentally misguided because there is nothing about the probabilities that would tell us if the phrases you found were deliberately designed. There are millions of other phrases with equally low probabilities that were not designed. So the probabilities tell us nothing. I've explained this to you many times, and you have responded by asserting that the meaningfulness of your phrases somehow implies that that their low probability implies design. But that's not true because when I make up my own very meaningful phrases you reject them because you don't like what they say. This exposes the fundamental error of your method - which is nothing but a glorified exercise in the twin cognitive errors of SELECTION BIAS + CONFIRMATION BIAS.

    Second, we must ask why an intelligent God would use such an unreliable method to "encode" things. I say "unreliable" because there is NO WAY for anyone to know if the "code" they found was intended by God. The small probabilities don't help because almost all "encodings" would have small probabilities. And the "meaning" doesn't help because that is very subjective, especially when you allow yourself to make up phrases that are not even found in the Bible and which many see as contradicting what is actually found in the Bible.

    Third, the probabilities of overlap are very, very high. The results you have shown are exactly what I would expect from random chance. Consider a random number that is found in the grid. What is the probability that it would overlap some other random number found in the grid? Let's take the simplest case when the two numbers occur just once, say x and y. Each number spans a set of columns in the grid: x spans columns x1 to x2 and y spans columns y1 to y2. The they overlap if and only if x2 ≥ y1 or x1 ≤ y2. Here's an image to help understand what we're talking about, with x spanning 20 to 59 and y spanning 6 to 21.

    Name:  bg_probality_example.JPG
Views: 17
Size:  37.6 KB


    In this example, there is on overlap because y2 = 21 > x1 = 20.

    So to calculate the probability, all we need to do is ask how many overlaps there would be for each possible number in the grid, and then divide by the total number of numbers in the grid.

    The total number of word strings is given by the triangular form of 83, i.e. there are Tri(83) = 83x84/2 = 3486. That's how many numbers there are in the grid, though not all are unique since there are many repeats.

    Now it's easier to count the misses than the hits. Then we can just subtract the misses from the total to get the number of hits. Let's begin by denoting a random number in the grid by (x1,x2). In the picture, this would be (20,59). How many word strings are there to the left of the red block? That's easy, it's just all the word strings in the small grid that has only 19 = x1 - 1 columns. This is simply Tri(x1 - 1). Likewise, the number of word strings on the right would be the number Tri(83 - x2). Thus, the total number of misses for this case would be:

    Tri(x1 - 1) + Tri(83 - x2) = Tri(19) + Tri(24) = 190 + 300 = 490

    And the probability of an overlap in this case is:

    p = (3486 - 490)/3486 = 85.9%

    A similar analysis would apply to every possible word string (x1,x2).

    As I said, the probability of an overlap is extremely high.

    CONCLUSION: Your grids show no evidence of design.
    • 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

+ Reply to Thread

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
  •