Google Ads

Google Ads

Bible Wheel Book

Google Ads

+ Reply to Thread
Page 6 of 6 FirstFirst ... 23456
Results 51 to 52 of 52
  1. #51
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    As an addendum to my last response, I would now like to show you all what is to me the single best piece of evidence that Genesis 1.1 was breathed by the Spirit. I was going to put it here, but it deserves a new thread.

  2. #52
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Yakima, Wa
    Quote Originally Posted by thebluetriangle View Post
    Let's treat it as a scientific hypothesis then. One could ask the question "Given the patterns within Genesis 1.1, which seem to point to triangle 2701, is chance or design more likely? (let's leave out for now who the designer was).

    Based on a numerical reading of Genesis 1.1 - and only Genesis 1.1 - using the pre-existing system of alphabetic numeration used by the Jews (this bypassing selection bias), what are the chances of obtaining the following coordinated geometric properties?

    1. Words 1 to 7 sum to the 73rd non-centred numerical triangle and a G-triangle (1/3 of all non-centred triangles).

    2. Words 6 + 7 sum to the 37th G-triangle, which is the 'core' triangle of T73.

    3. Words 1 + 3 + 5 + 6 sum to 1801, the 25th centred hexagon formed by the self-intersection of T73.

    Including subtraction, we have

    4. Word 1 - word 4 - word 7 sums to 216, the perimeter of T73.

    5. Words (1 + 2 + 3 + 4) = words (5 + 6 + 7)sums to 505, the 13th trefoil, which fits snugly within T37 and therefore (when inverted) with T73.

    6. Words (1 + 2) - words (3 + 4 + 5) + words (6 + 7) sum to 937, the hexagram that fits snugly inside T73.

    7. Words (3 + 4 + 5 ) + words (6 + 7) - words ( 1 + 2) sum to 469, the hexagon that fits inside hexagram 937.

    If we expand to include G-triangle geometry in general, we have

    8. Word 1 - 2 + 3 - 4 + 5 - 6 + 7 = 679, a star tetrahedron based on G-triangle 91 (T13).

    9. Words 3 + 4 + 5 + 6 + 7 = 1585, the 23rd trefoil (antisnowflake equivalent of a hexagram). This is also the 33rd centred triangle and each of these can be created from the template of a G-triangle. See here. The G-triangle template for 1585 is 4753 (T97) and subtracting 1585 units gives 3168, Kurios Ihsous Christos. So 3168 may not be found in the first few words but it is implied - and within G1.1!

    All this and much more is found just from reading the first seven words as numbers and by the simple manipulations of those words - and nothing else.

    The Bible is not a natural object, but the numerical subtext can perhaps be treated as one, given the 'null hypothesis' that there is no relationship between the meaning of the words themselves and their numerical values. Given all of the above findings, I would hypothesise that there has been some level of design in the text, and that the designer is aware of the structural properties of G-triangles. We could further speculate (treating the Bible's numerical properties as 'natural') that nature itself may contain some deep level of design.

    It seems to me that the only way of disproving this hypothesis is by showing that it is a trivial matter to find the basic properties of a single geometric object within a single verse of seven words.
    Hey there Bill,

    I like your suggestion to treat this as a "scientific hypothesis." It seems the fist step is to ask how scientists would tackle this specific kind of hypothesis. Are you aware of any scientific literature that has used statistics to establish whether a small segment of text contained patterns that were "designed" independently of the plain text? It seems very important to find an example from established science because neither of us are professional statisticians, and statistics are notoriously tricky, often leading to false conclusions. The mere fact that something is "unlikely" typically tells us nothing about "design" because any random event is typically "unlikely" such as the exact position that a pebble falls when I toss it randomly.
    • 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

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

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


Posting Permissions

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