Google Ads

Google Ads

Bible Wheel Book

Google Ads

+ Reply to Thread
Page 3 of 33 FirstFirst 123456713 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 323
  1. #21
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    230
    Quote Originally Posted by Richard Amiel McGough View Post
    Hey there Bill,

    I see these patterns involve the definite article. Did God change his mind? Didn't you say that NOT using the definite article was part of His Divine Design in the other pattern? I'm sure I must have missed something. I cannot imagine an intelligent God using such inconsistent methods, and I'm sure you wouldn't be using such inconsistent methods. So please explain what I missed.

    Thanks!

    In the ark encodings we've been discussing, there is no definite article. But that doesn't mean it isn't used elsewhere. In this page I show the four word strings as a complete set. The next encryption is 'the Ark of the Testimony'. Why the definite article this time? Because this is a different set of encodings, based on the Hebrew words each time. Again, the rules are consistent within the set. The Hebrew words are arown eduwth, which is translated in the NIV as 'the ark of the testimony'.

    The encodings you are asking about have two phrases with and two without the definite article, yes. They form a neat 18-14-14-18 pattern, bookending each testament and you have to admit they are compelling. The neat numerical pattern and the other features I discuss in the page I think strengthen the case for them being real encodings. Only you, the reader, can decide if you are convinced, though. The same decoding procedure was followed each time in the text and the pattern just 'jumped out'.

    Considerations of symmetry can help in finding patterns. In Bisecting the Bible I found the two central verses, which are really one statement (and an inspiring one, in the middle of what is a sombre passage):

    So the name of the Lord will be declared in Zion, and his praise in Jerusalem, when the peoples and the kingdoms assemble to worship the Lord.
    (Psalm 102.21-22)

    The first eighteen words of the NIV gave JESUS SECOND COMING and the last eighteen words gave THE LORD SECOND COMING. So I numerated the first eighteen words of these two verses and got THE SECOND APPEARING. Then I did the last eighteen words and got 953, or SECOND MANIFESTATION. The two central verses seem to be reflecting the Bibe as a whole! The total number of words is 27 and the central 19 words are 925, giving JESUS CHRIST. So Christ is there at the heart of the NIV Bible! There are 16 less verses in the NIV than in the KJV, so the central two verses are different. I was slightly perturbed that the definite article wasn't used in the second encryption, but it's another compelling pattern, which reflected the larger pattern of the outer two bookend encodings.

    Finding this beautiful little set was interesting and instructive, because I initially miscalculated the two central verses and couldn't find anything in the two I thought were central. I recalculated, found the correct verses, and again they just jumped out. The patterns of encoded word strings were clear and distinct.

  2. #22
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    230
    Quote Originally Posted by Richard Amiel McGough View Post
    No, I'm not telling God what to do. I'm telling YOU what a real code looks like.
    You are talking about codes created by man. This is a GOD CREATED CODE (as the ELS encryption so succinctly states). You haven't commented on the little ELS codes I've found. These are independent of the gematria codes yet support them. GOD CREATED CODE ends on the last letter of word 24, which is where ATONEMENT COVER ends. 24 is Ihsous (r), Word (r), Holy (r). And what about the 888 encrypted into two separate encodings of GOD, one in the page I linked to, the other here?

    Quote Originally Posted by Richard Amiel McGough View Post
    Your results are cherry picked from an ocean of possibilities.
    I'm still waiting on you showing me how the ark encodings are cherry picked.

    Quote Originally Posted by Richard Amiel McGough View Post
    The probability of find something "meaningful" is near certainty. You are the one making the claims. It has nothing to do with "God" per se, except that your codes do not look like anything an intelligent God would design because it would be extremely irrational to design codes that are based fundamentally on cognitive errors and are indistinguishable from the ten thousand false patterns from every contrary belief system that litters the history of religious literature.
    I find it relatively easy to distinguish between the code and most other claimed codes. Like you, I have been approached by people claiming to have found a code. Some were more impressive than others but most were based on something more like numerology than gematria. I started in similar vein, but was fortunate to have an early effort severely criticised by Vernon Jenkins, which raised my consiousness. They usually had a particular theology or agenda to promote too. I had no theology to defend, no denomination to blinker me and agenda other than to fulfil the mission I was given. My sole purpose has been to unlock the code.

    Quote Originally Posted by Richard Amiel McGough View Post
    Say what? You found a CONSTENT pattern? Please share! I have yet to see any consistent pattern. If you have found it, then you can easily prove it with statistics because that's what statistics was designed to do. To show consistent patterns ... or prove they are not there. I would be utterly stunned if you found a consistent pattern that was statistically significant.
    Look at this and this.

    In these pages, each encryption is based on

    1) the first instance of a Hebrew word or phrase in the Masoretic
    2) the exact translation of that word or phrase in the NIV.

    This is done with a great deal of consisteny throughout. There are a few minor deviations from absolute consistency, but they are always logical: one is because the gematria was very large, so a shorter phrase seems to have been substituted; another when a longer phrase was substituted for a word because the gematria was too small (16) to be encoded.

  3. #23
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Yakima, Wa
    Posts
    15,146
    Quote Originally Posted by thebluetriangle View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Richard Amiel McGough
    No, I'm not telling God what to do. I'm telling YOU what a real code looks like.
    You are talking about codes created by man. This is a GOD CREATED CODE (as the ELS encryption so succinctly states). You haven't commented on the little ELS codes I've found. These are independent of the gematria codes yet support them. GOD CREATED CODE ends on the last letter of word 24, which is where ATONEMENT COVER ends. 24 is Ihsous (r), Word (r), Holy (r). And what about the 888 encrypted into two separate encodings of GOD, one in the page I linked to, the other here?
    No, I am not talking about "codes created by man" as opposed to a "GOD CREATED CODE". That has absolutely nothing to do with the point I was making.

    My point is that you have a blatant double standard designed to protect your claims from criticism. In effect, you are saying "Heads I win, tails you lose." Your entire "proof" of the "code" is that YOU PREDICTED that God would design the code a certain way, and then you looked and found your prediction was fulfilled. But when I do exactly the same thing, with the only difference being that my prediction was NOT fulfilled, you cry foul and tell me that I am NOT allowed to make any predictions because that would be telling God what to do!

    Why are you allowed to make predictions about what God would do, but I am not?

    Why does the fulfillment of your predictions prove design, whereas the failure of my predictions prove nothing?

    This is the most important question. All your claims are of the same form:

    1) Predict that God would code things a certain way.
    2) Show that those predictions are true.

    So your entire thesis is one grand assertion about "What God would do" supported by examples of how he actually did what you said he would do.

    Now I come along and follow your lead, and make some very reasonable predictions about what an intelligent designer would do. Those predictions fail. So what do you do? Do you accept that the failure is evidence against your claims? Nope. You commit the fallacy of special pleading and make up excuses for why YOU are free to make predictions but any predictions that are not fulfilled are not evidence because that would be "telling God what to do."

    Your logic is blatantly inconsistent. You have a double standard designed to protect your claims from any criticism.

    Your methods are diametrically opposed to the scientific method which you mimic even as you violate it. The first job of a scientist is to devise an experiment that will prove the hypothesis FALSE! That's how real science works. It is folly of the first order to only accept evidence that confirms your hypothesis while rejecting all the evidence against it.

    Quote Originally Posted by thebluetriangle View Post
    I find it relatively easy to distinguish between the code and most other claimed codes. Like you, I have been approached by people claiming to have found a code. Some were more impressive than others but most were based on something more like numerology than gematria. I started in similar vein, but was fortunate to have an early effort severely criticised by Vernon Jenkins, which raised my consiousness. They usually had a particular theology or agenda to promote too. I had no theology to defend, no denomination to blinker me and agenda other than to fulfil the mission I was given. My sole purpose has been to unlock the code.
    What is the difference between numerology and gematria? And how does your work differ from other Bible codes? I don't see any difference in principle between your "codes" and the kind of stuff everyone else has done.
    • 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

  4. #24
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    230
    Quote Originally Posted by Richard Amiel McGough View Post
    What is the difference between numerology and gematria? And how does your work differ from other Bible codes? I don't see any difference in principle between your "codes" and the kind of stuff everyone else has done.
    One difference between me and almost everyone else who claims to have found a code is that I was given the key to unlocking it.

    I've mentioned the Key a few times, and now it's time to tell you about how I was given it, what it is, and why it convinced me that there is a code.

    Beginning in April 1998 with a spectacular vision of three discs of light in triangular formation, I had a three-and-a-half year spiritual awakening, during which I experienced many things, read hundreds of books on religion, spirituality and the paranormal and felt myself being nudged towards becoming a Christian. In October 2000 I started going to church and on 12/28/01 actually became a Christian. In the months running up to my conversion I was assailed almost daily by unusual experiences, and nightly by numinous dreams, feeling as if external reality had become one with my inner world. I felt as if I was at the centre of a spiritual whirlwind and, like Dorothy, was carried away to a place I'd never even suspected was there. For example I had encounters with people, flesh and blood, who let it be known that they were to be regarded as angels. They knew my every thought and took me through a series of lessons, within which the number 4 was deeply woven. I started keeping a file on my experiences, which now runs to about 200 pages but could easily have been 2000 pages long.

    In May 2001, I had an extraordinary set of experiences involving the number 444, lasting four days. In the summer of 2001 I was introduced to gematria and soon became fascinated by it, eventually discovering that Dammaseq (Damascus) summed to 444 in Hebrew gematria and wondering if that meant I was, like Paul, on the road to Damascus. Having become interested in Christianity and now attending church (Church of Scotland) I was invited to take the Alpha Course, which I enjoyed and which made me more comfortable with Christianity, about which I many doubts. The peak of these experiences occurred in November 2001, specifically from 11/11/01 to 19/11/01. On 11/11/01 I went to the Alpha Course's "Holy Spirit weekend" and had a powerful experience of the Holy Spirit, which healed me of a problem I had (the healing took two days). Two days after that, now healed, I made my first code find and, after wondering for years what it was all about, now felt an absolute certainty that I had found my calling. Two days after that, on 15/11/01, I had the strange experience of twice switching on the radio as I was driving to and from work, to hear the opening chords of Verdi's overture La Forza Del Destino (the Force of Destiny). I was now sure that destiny had called me.

    On 26/11/01 I went to an Alpha Course meeting and as we chatted afterwards I recounted a dream I'd had about moving into a new house. At that point the director of the course told the assembled group about something that had occurred to her on 15/11/01, the day I'd twice heard the overture. She was sitting in the cafe we were in, reading her bible, an NIV. As she read a certain passage an inner voice told her THIS IS FOR BILL. She continued reading and again heard THIS IS FOR BILL. She didn't usually get locutions and was a little perturbed by it, so she slipped a plain piece of paper into the bible as a bookmark then made a cup of tea. When she returned the passage she'd been reading was typed onto the bookmark, between Dear Bill and Love Paul. The passage was 1 Thessalonians 5:23-24. Not only that, but the words were arranged to suggest a key. The cafe was called the open door. The director told us this story, then turned to me, told me she was sure I was the Bill being referred to and asked what was going on. Feeling embarrassed, I told her I might have discovered something in the Bible.

    Here are those words, exactly as she received them, with the approximate font and the correct italics, etc. The spaces at the top and bottom are a little too wide but I don't know how to change the leading (I still have the bookmark and checked before I typed it).

    Dear Bill

    May God himself, the God of peace, sanctify you through
    and through. May your whole spirit, soul and body be kept
    blameless at the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ.
    The one who calls you is faithful and he will do it.

    Love Paul


    So this is the key. It took me years to figure out what to do with it, since I had a huge learning curve ahead of me and was just beginning to work with gematria. But I eventually got it. It's composed of two verses, 1 Thess 5.23, May God himself, the God of peace, sanctify you through and through. May your whole spirit, soul and body be kept blameless until the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ., and 1 Thess 5.24, The one who calls you is faithful and he will do it. The ordinal values of each verse are as follows:

    1 Thess 5.23 (o) = 1559
    1 Thess. 5.24 (o) = 468

    These are the standard values of the following

    Our Lord Jesus Christ (s) = 1559
    The Lord God (s) = 468

    Note that 'Our Lord Jesus Christ' is actually in that first verse. The total ordinal value of the verses plus the emboldened words is 2194. This happens to be the standard value of Genesis 1.1 in the NIV. So I was given the decoding method and the place where I should begin. I did eventually, although I dragged my heels for a while, immediately found JESUS over the first twelve words, then took it from there.

    There are other numbers in the Key. For instance, it has 42 words and 169 letters, which suggest hexagon 169, with an outline of 42 counters.

    That is how I was given the Key, in the Open Door cafe, on 15/11/01 (the date is significant too). Without it, the code would probably have remained unopened. Using it under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, both directly, and lately through many words received and passed on by Kathryn LeCorre, I was able to fully open the door. Others helped too in smaller ways, including Vernon Jenkins and yourself, Richard. You all have my gratitude.

    So I didn't find the decoding system I use: I was given it. Neither did I decide to look for a code in the Bible: I was given that as an assignment. I always wondered why I'd been given it, because I knew almost nothing about the Bible. But I see now that this was a distinct advantage, since I could look at the NIV Bible with fresh eyes and without theological or denominational blinkers, or even much religious feeling. I was free to look on it as a puzzle to be solved - and the solving of it has taken over fifteen years.
    Last edited by thebluetriangle; 04-17-2017 at 11:48 PM.

  5. #25
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Yakima, Wa
    Posts
    15,146
    Quote Originally Posted by thebluetriangle View Post
    On 26/11/01 I went to an Alpha Course meeting and as we chatted afterwards I recounted a dream I'd had about moving into a new house. At that point the director of the course told the assembled group about something that had occurred to her on 15/11/01, the day I'd twice heard the overture. She was sitting in the cafe we were in, reading her bible, an NIV. As she read a certain passage an inner voice told her THIS IS FOR BILL. She continued reading and again heard THIS IS FOR BILL. She didn't usually get locutions and was a little perturbed by it, so she slipped a plain piece of paper into the bible as a bookmark then made a cup of tea. When she returned the passage she'd been reading was typed onto the bookmark, between Dear Bill and Love Paul. The passage was 1 Thessalonians 5:23-24. Not only that, but the words were arranged to suggest a key. The cafe was called the open door. The director told us this story, then turned to me, told me she was sure I was the Bill being referred to and asked what was going on. Feeling embarrassed, I told her I might have discovered something in the Bible.

    Here are those words, exactly as she received them, with the approximate font and the correct italics, etc. The spaces at the top and bottom are a little too wide but I don't know how to change the leading (I still have the bookmark and checked before I typed it).

    Dear Bill

    May God himself, the God of peace, sanctify you through
    and through. May your whole spirit, soul and body be kept
    blameless until the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ.
    The one who calls you is faithful and he will do it.

    Love Paul


    So this is the key. It took me years to figure out what to do with it, since I had a huge learning curve ahead of me and was just beginning to work with gematria. But I eventually got it. It's composed of two verses, 1 Thess 5.23, May God himself, the God of peace, sanctify you through and through. May your whole spirit, soul and body be kept blameless until the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ., and 1 Thess 5.24, The one who calls you is faithful and he will do it. The ordinal values of each verse are as follows:

    1 Thess 5.23 (o) = 1559
    1 Thess. 5.24 (o) = 468

    These are the standard values of the following

    Our Lord Jesus Christ (s) = 1559
    The Lord God (s) = 468

    Note that 'Our Lord Jesus Christ' is actually in that first verse. The total ordinal value of the verses plus the emboldened words is 2194. This happens to be the standard value of Genesis 1.1 in the NIV. So I was given the decoding method and the place where I should begin. I did eventually, although I dragged my heels for a while, immediately found JESUS over the first twelve words, then took it from there.
    Hey there Bill,

    As I've stated more than once, I understand and appreciate the impact of your personal experiences. I had similar experiences that led to my belief in gematria and the Bible Wheel. And many other people with very different beliefs tell of similar experiences. Such experiences are very convincing to the people who have them, but they don't actually prove anything.

    Now as for your story - are you saying that the women who gave you that note claimed the message was miraculously typed by God himself? I trust you understand how implausible that sounds. I would be interested to see it. Could you post an image of it?

    It appears your memory of the text is slightly off. The word "until" should be "at." Then the numbers match (the value is 1559 with "at").

    Now you emphasize the fact that the text actually contains "Our Lord Jesus Christ" as if that confirms your belief that God encoded it. But if that confirms the pattern, why doesn't the lack of "The Lord God" discomfirm it? It looks like your method is designed so that there could not be any way to prove it wrong. It looks like it is a grand exercise in confirmation bias. The ONLY evidence that is accepted is evidence that "confirms" your code. All other evidence is ignored or explained away.

    I saw the same thing with your "ark of the testimony" code. You found two phrases in Hebrews 9 that matched your pattern and so you say that "God did it." But then, in the SAME IMMEDIATE CONTEXT, God chose to use a different phrase "ark of the covenant" which doesn't fit the pattern. Why would he do that if he was deliberately encoding a code based on "ark of the testimony"? Why didn't he use the term that fit the pattern? Again, you are showing a strong confirmation bias. You accept only the data that fits what you want to believe. Data that doesn't fit is rejected.

    So here is the $64,000 question: How could you discern between a coded text and a random text?

    Or to put it another way: What kind of evidence would prove your claims false?

    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

  6. #26
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Yakima, Wa
    Posts
    15,146
    Quote Originally Posted by thebluetriangle View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Richard Amiel McGough
    Your "a priori prediction" that God coded "atonement cover" and "cherubim of the glory" is a statement of what you thought God would do. Then you found it, so now you state unequivocally that you believe it is what God actually did. How then can you tell me NOT to make similar predictions? Why are you free to make predictions and then claim "confirmation" when you find it, but I cannot make predictions and test them? It appears the only standard by which you judge is whether or not the result confirms what you want to believe. No "predictions" are allowed if they don't confirm what you want to believe.
    I have no objection to you making your own predictions and testing them. But you made a complete list of everything mentioned in Hebrews 9 and looked for it in the first few words of Genesis, apparently thinking that because three of the items were mentioned in Hebrews 9 that was somehow significant. What was significant was that the four items are only worded that way in the NIV. The fact that three of them are in those verses was irrelevant. Some of the Hebrews items were found in the Holy Place, not the Most Holy Place, but you added them all in, so it was inconsistent. If it turned out not to be statistically improbable I imagine you would have seen it as evidence that the code was a mirage, and went on to perform similar analyses to 'prove' it. But all you would have proven was that you didn't understand how the code worked. The four encodings were based on what was in the Most Holy Place and used the first (or only) formal title used in the NIV every time - the hallmark of consistency. In another page I show how the first mention of every item associated with the ark is encoded in Hebrew (Masoretic) and English (NIV). Again, it is very consistent.
    I think you missed my point. You created your pattern using three phrases from Hebrews 9 that describe the "ark of the covenant" (the phrase used in Hebrews 9). But that doesn't fit the pattern, so you had to use the other phrase "ark of the testimony." My point was that I would predict that a designer would have used "ark of the testimony" in Hebrews 9 because that would fit his design. What could be more obvious, rational, and reasonable? You use the same logic all the time. But it didn't work in this case, so you rejected my prediction as "telling God what to do", as if all your "predictions" are somehow different. The truth is this: You accept "predictions" only if you find "evidence" supporting them. You reject all predictions that fail to confirm what you want to believe. That's a monstrous "confirmation bias". Your entire method is designed to only confirm what you want to believe, and to reject anything that would prove you wrong.

    Quote Originally Posted by thebluetriangle View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Richard Amiel McGough
    Think about this. I have very good reasons to ask why God would choose to use "ark of the covenant" which DOES NOT FIT with the predicted pattern.
    It does not fit with YOUR predicted pattern. I wouldn't have predicted it.

    As for your 'very good reasons', I'm confused about what you're saying here. God used ark of the testimony, not ark of the covenant.
    My "good reasons" are the same as the reason you use when you try to prove the truth of your patterns. Case in point: YOU emphasized the fact that the text of the message contained the phrase "Our Lord Jesus Christ" which matched the value of the verse. I used the same logic, saying that if God had designed "atonement cover" and "cherubim of the Glory" to be part of the pattern of Genesis 1, why would he choose to use "ark of the covenant" in the immediate context (Hebrews 9) of those two phrases when it doesn't fit the pattern? What kind of "designer" would toss in things that didn't fit his pattern when it would be trivial to use the term that does fit (i.e. "ark of the testimony")? This weakens your claim that God deliberately designed these coincidences. They look like exactly what I would expect from random chance. I see no sign of "intelligent design." On the contrary, I see you cherry picking the things that fit, and ignoring the things that don't. You have no way to discern between hits that were "designed" and hits that result from random chance.

    Quote Originally Posted by Richard Amiel McGough
    That works for you too. How do you know you are not unconsciously choosing methods you know are irrelevant, so you can rationalise your new worldview? And demolish another code of course.
    If I were doing that, I could trust you to point them out, just like I do for you.

    I have identified your error. You accept evidence only if it confirms what you want to believe. All other evidence is rejected, ignored, or explained away.
    • 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

  7. #27
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    230
    Quote Originally Posted by Richard Amiel McGough View Post
    No, I am not talking about "codes created by man" as opposed to a "GOD CREATED CODE". That has absolutely nothing to do with the point I was making.
    Yes, you are talking about man-made codes, because they are the only codes you accept at present. Or is there a bible code out there you do accept? But on to your point.

    Quote Originally Posted by Richard Amiel McGough View Post
    My point is that you have a blatant double standard designed to protect your claims from criticism. In effect, you are saying "Heads I win, tails you lose." Your entire "proof" of the "code" is that YOU PREDICTED that God would design the code a certain way, and then you looked and found your prediction was fulfilled. But when I do exactly the same thing, with the only difference being that my prediction was NOT fulfilled, you cry foul and tell me that I am NOT allowed to make any predictions because that would be telling God what to do!
    First of all, I have a feel for how the code works and you don't. I could see right away that you were blundering in there with an inappropriate method, based on the misaprehension that I was talking three of my phrases Hebrews 9.Three of them are found therem but I was choosing them on the basis of primacy. In fact, only one of them is first found in Hebrews 9.

    Quote Originally Posted by Richard Amiel McGough View Post
    Why are you allowed to make predictions about what God would do, but I am not?
    I already said I had no objection to that, but I did object to your approach, which was clearly based on the misunderstanding I highlighted above.

    Quote Originally Posted by Richard Amiel McGough View Post
    Why does the fulfillment of your predictions prove design, whereas the failure of my predictions prove nothing?
    The code isn't provable in the sense of a mathematical theorem. It isn't a natural object either, so the methods used in the natural sciences are probably not really applicable. In fact none of the sciences, natural or social, have any method I'm aware of that could show it was real. As I said at the start, some of the best statisticians and probability theorists have looked at the Torah codes and come to opposing conclusions, usually based on what they believed to start with. I'm NOT saying that some kind of method couldn't be developed. I am saying that it hasn't been done yet, and I would add that it would take some effort and a lot of expertise. I am also sure that in the end it is not provable and that people will recognise the code is real, rather than have it proven. I think the best that could be done is to show that it is statistically improbable, but that would require methods that can deal with the essential question of meaning. As an example, using seventy single-word names and titles for Jesus I calculated a 1-in-1200 probability of the Signature phenomenon being real. But the words found there (Jesus, Yehoshua, Word, Messiah) would all be near the top of any list of such words. Cutting it down to the top twenty gave a probability of 1 in 50000 against chance. But even that is an underestimate, I feel (and I know there's more to it than that, which I am willing to discuss). So how do you determine how high up the list these words should be? How strongly related in meaning a word like 'Friend' is to 'Jesus'? Would it be higher or lower than 'Word'? That would be the only way to get a more accurate handle on the probabilities.


    Quote Originally Posted by Richard Amiel McGough View Post
    This is the most important question. All your claims are of the same form:

    1) Predict that God would code things a certain way.
    2) Show that those predictions are true.

    So your entire thesis is one grand assertion about "What God would do" supported by examples of how he actually did what you said he would do.
    As I said at the start, the code is basically a phenomenon, a crystalisation within the NIV Bible (now the most popular English version, remember). It's like a fossil dug up. I used to go looking for fossils and it was easy to mistake lines, crystalisation patterns and veins of minerals for fossils. Having found some genuine fossils you could then predict that others might be found in the same locale, or in the same type of rock, but fossils were found before they were predicted. Dinosaur fossils weren't even widely suspected, because in the west nearly everyone was a Creationist. So they were a discovery, essentially. So it is with the code. I didn't predict God would do things at the start. I did a lot of trials and slowly built up an idea of what was there, how to distinguish it from what was not there, and made little predictions for the purpose of finding more material. I got it wrong a lot of times, more than I care to mention. But I eventually saw the real patterns that were there, aided by the Key, which was indispensibe. So I found JESUS SECOND COMING in the fiirst 18 words of the NIV and 'predicted', or if you like 'guessed', that the last 18 words might be encrypted. And I found THE LORD SECOND COMING. That was real evidence (not proof) that I was on the right track. I didn't invent anything or use some weird system (like JESUS = 666) to give the result I wanted. I used the system the Key taught me. That could only give one answer. There was no cherry picking involved either, because there is only one 18-word string running backwards from the last word. The last nine words gave SECOND COMING (391) and the nine before that gave THE LORD (397). Simples. (And 9 means endings, finality, judgment, fruits, suffering, which is appropriate for the last words of the Apocalypse of John). I did much of it like that. Predicting what God would do? A bit, yes, but mainly looking for patterns, based on aesthetics, consistency and meaning. So, although it is grand, it's NOT a thesis, it's a discovery, like finding a new fossil. You are acting like a biblical fundamentalist, who is convinced that dinosaurs couldn't exist and is determined to prove it, which so far has consisted of one accusation after another.

    I'll ask you one more time. Can you show me how the ark encodings in Genesis are cherry picked?

  8. #28
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Yakima, Wa
    Posts
    15,146
    Quote Originally Posted by thebluetriangle View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Richard Amiel McGough
    Hey there Bill,

    I'm glad we are digging down on this point, because it is of central importance. I don't see how the subjective "meaning" has anything to do with probability. I thought we had agreed that probability tells us nothing in an analysis of post hoc cherry picked data. It gives us no "sign of design" in any way at all because you all patterns - whether meaningful or meaningless - will have low probability. This point really needs to be either understood or refuted:
    Whoa there! You said the data was cherry picked, not me. I chose the example of the ark, cover, cherubim and altar all proceeding from word 1, because it's fairly clear they are not cherry picked. They are not even totally post hoc, because as I said I predicted and found two of them after finding the first. If you mean I cherry picked my best example, I could have chosen many more. I chose that because it is more obvious than the others. There are only 37 possible word strings (from word 1) up to word 37, which is where 'ark of the testimony' stops. How is finding the two items of furniture found in the Most Holy Place, plus the atonement cover and cherubim, within such a small data set cherry picking? There are only 37 numbers, so finding four so meaningfully interelated to each other and to the most important concept in the Old Testament, whilst referring to the version they are found in - the only one, remember, that uses these four titles - is something of a miracle, which is exactly what it is - a frozen miracle.
    Hey there Bill,

    When I say "cherry picked" I mean the words you picked to match the numbers you found, like "atonement cover" = 1169. It doesn't matter if you "predicted" you would find that number. That's just your private personal experience. The point is that you have many MILLIONS of possible phrases that sum to that number. You could have made a "code" using any of those millions upon millions of possibilities. There is nothing in the text that tells you that you should pick one pattern over another, and there are literally millions upon millions of possible choices.

    I analyzed an English dictionary and found that there are 325 words that sum to 611 = "atonement" and 342 that sum to 558 = "cover". Thus, there are 325 x 342 = 117,990 possible two word combinations that sum to 1169 = "atonement cover" in which both words have the same values as the two you chose. But those weren't the only way to do it. You could have scanned through the list of 326 words that sum to 612 and the list of 334 words that sum to 557 and you would have another set of 108,884 phrases. And you could do it again, using 610 + 559 for another list of over a 100,000 two word phrases that might fit some pattern.

    You could do this for every possible way of combining two words that sum to 1169. A rough calculation following the examples above says that there would be roughly 100,000 possibilities for each pair and there are 1158 possible pairs, so the total number of possible two word phrases that would sum to 1159 is about 1158 x 100000 = 115.8 MILLION pairs!

    And the same facts hold for the other phrases. And the numbers grow exponentially with each additional word you allow to be included, such as phrases made with three or four words.

    Thus, I have PROVEN that you have an effectively INFINITE OCEAN of random numbers and phrases that you are drawing from. You didn't notice this because you focus only on what you were hoping to find. Anyone who understand the magnitude of your sample space can immediately see that your patterns were cherry picked from a vast set of meaningless possibilities.

    That's what I mean when I say "cherry picking."
    • 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

  9. #29
    And Bill. The NIV version Genesis 1:1 is not the central one to the codes in the Hebrew Bible.
    The King James Version is.

    I checked connections to number 430 with methods that are very central and I noticed that it does not hit significance nearly like the KJV. (411)

    I cant prove that now but when I make the Divinity Holograph, then you will understand.
    You should really start looking in the KJV instead.
    Last edited by Desmild; 04-02-2017 at 03:14 PM.

  10. #30
    But don't worry, you will probably start seeing it when I finish the Holograph that I will make for Richard. its finished tomorrow and I was only going to give you guys 1/3rd of the Holograph.

    But since you are so convinced of the NIV I am going to give you guys the whole thing.

    Best regards, your neighbour in Norway
    Desmild

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 5 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 5 guests)

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

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