Did anyone expect this bombshell?

[One Bad Pig]

Biblewheel gave up. I think he even lost his faith.

Lost his faith, and eventually debunked his own work.

Maybe our resident wanna-be messiah "Geert"/sylvius/kofh2u will show up. He's always good for giving numbers a spin.

[Christianbookworm]

Why do these guys think there is a code in the Bible!!! Why...just, why...

[Sparko]

If you count the number of loaves of bread in the bible*, add in the number of times fish are mentioned, divided by the number of books in the old testament, then take the square-root of the number of letters in all of God's names in the bible and multiply THAT by 777 you get the name "Jesus" in Morse code. It's true!

*It only works in the King James Bible, because that is the Bible Jesus used.

[metacrock]

I do not mean to put you down. There is a reason why no major scholar takes this seriously.

[metacrock]

if you count the number of loaves of bread in the bible*, add in the number of times fish are mentioned, divided by the number of books in the old testament, then take the square-root of the number of letters in all of god's names in the bible and multiply that by 777 you get the name "jesus" in morse code. It's true!

*it only works in the king james bible, because that is the bible jesus used.

\
rotflol ;-)

[seer]

I do not mean to put you down. There is a reason why no major scholar takes this seriously.

Is this metacrock from CARM?

[Super Cow]

Might as well add my two cents to this, point by point. I'm unclear as to the validity of the rules of the mathematical analysis.

(1) Nobody can doubt that the Bible explicitly ascribes theological significance to certain numbers; of which 7 is the chief, by common consent.

True enough.

(2) For a whole range of reasons which I describe, 8 is associated with Jesus.

This idea is new to me. The only numbers I have seen that have had special significance (even minor) in the Bible are 6, 7, 10, 12, 40, 666, 1000, 144000. (Or sometimes products of these)

(3) Therefore since, according to the NT, Jesus is God incarnate, one expects both 7 and 8 to be associated with him in contrast to all other numbers.

Again, I would ascribe greater significance to the combination of 7 (heavenly completeness) & 10 (earthly completeness) over 7 & 8.

(4) If there is anything at all in the idea of 'covert' Biblical numerics, it should reveal itself at the simplest level possible; if not, there is no point in expecting it at any more abstruse level.

Not sure about that. Revelation seems pretty abstruse; otherwise there wouldn't be so many interpretations of it.

(5) Pretty much the simplest statistic that can be imagined re. a text, is the number of letters in it. (Well, maybe the number of words, but for the present inquiry that would be tricky as the phrases are biased to being shorter than 7 words long.)

(6) Therefore, I undertook to go through the entire Greek NT, selecting every phrase and clause describing Jesus' unique identity and attributes (as determined by explicit NT teaching), and testing the letter counts of the resulting data set for divisibility by 7 or 8.

Why use the NT. Other than the 4 gospels and Acts, it's mostly a collection of letters that were copied and passed around the various churches that are teachings about how to live your life. If I was going to look for code in the Bible, I would start with the OT, Pentateuch, like the Bible code theorists use. And then you have to use the original language.

(7) The probability that a random number is divisible by 7 or by 8 (or both) is 15/56 or about 0.267.
(8) The total number of theologically qualifying word strings I found on initial investigation was 783. Of them, 449 were db7 or db8.
(9) The expected number of 'numerically' qualifying word strings is about 210.

You basically found twice the expected number of strings that fit your criteria. That doesn't seem especially significant to me. What does theologically qualifying mean? It sounds like a way to whittle down the choices into a preferred outcome.

(10) For this binomially-distributed random variable (re. divisibility or not), the chance of getting at least 449 qualifying strings out of 783 turns out to be 1.24 x 10^-71.

Something is mathematically wrong with this calculation. I'm not sure how you came to this, but I suspect you did not divide by all the possible patterns, because it's a fairly complicated statistical variance formula that is required.

Grab a random book online and run the same statistics. Check the distribution of all 10 digits and see how many have one or two numbers that come out way ahead by the end of the book. In the end, I don't see anything earth-shattering from the thesis here.

[Jedidiah]

Why do these guys think there is a code in the Bible!!! Why...just, why...

They look for a way around the clear message of what the words say.

[One Bad Pig]

Is this metacrock from CARM?

Yes, he has referenced dialogues with Jichard there.

[Rushing Jaws]

I like math.

I don't like Biblical numerics. It's one thing to ponder the significance of numbers like 7 and 40 in the Bible. It's another to find numeric patterns. You can always find numeric pattern oddities in any text.



This has to be one of the most ridiculously obtuse ones I've seen. Now, I'm sure you put a lot of work into this. I don't like to sound dismissive of such a math effort. But you've found a strange, time-consuming hobby that provides no conclusions.

I want to see this tested on the Harry Potter books. They are so full of meaning, that maybe they would yield significant numerical patterns. And after that, I would like a numerical analysis of the 15 Wheel of Time books.

[One Bad Pig]

I want to see this tested on the Harry Potter books. They are so full of meaning, that maybe they would yield significant numerical patterns. And after that, I would like a numerical analysis of the 15 Wheel of Time books.

The Bible Code method has found stuff in all sorts of works.

I re-read the whole WoT series before reading the final book. I noticed a distinct drop in quality when Brandon Sanderson took over; his character dialogue was awful. The last book was a massive disappointment.

[Meh Gerbil]

Please dear God no.

[Trout]

Please dear God no.

Let me break that post down:

Pleas edear godno

5 letters and one space in each grouping

5+1=6

What Gerbil said was

666

If there were ever a clear reason to remove him from the forum its this.

[Juvenal]

If there were ever a clear reason to remove him from the forum its this.

If there's anything worse than Trout trying to count, it's his rampant abuse of apostrophes.

[Meh Gerbil]

I think it is ridicul6ous to look fo6r coded message6s in Scripture.
Because HAIL LORD SATAN it is impossible to refute KILL YOURSELF and anything that doesn't fit KILL YOUR PARENTS pattern is ignored.
Hopefully people USE THE TERM [BUTT] ON TWEB will see this as foolish and VOTE HILLARY move on.