The AUTHOR is GOD

[Enoch2021]

For reference, these were the "codes" found in Moby Dick:

 

http://cs.anu.edu.au/~bdm/dilugim/moby.html

 

 

Did you read this document??

 

Let me show you the caveat @ the bottom .....

 

"A note to the credulous

It has come to my attention that some people have taken this page as claiming that Moby Dick really predicted the assassinations of famous people. Please be assured that none of these patterns happened by other than pure random chance."

 

What did I say in my post to Connor......My Comment:  "I'm sure based on just probability and your convention, people can come up with alot of "alleged" codes in just about any document."

 

 

So they just conjured up something in other words.....

 

Hey Letters they make words....Words mean something.

 

How does this compare to the Torah Code??

 

What was the Template/Convention/ Decoder they used?

 

I bet I could take any lengthy document and find all the American Made Pies in it.

 

This is Laughable Neb

[nebula]

 

For reference, these were the "codes" found in Moby Dick:

 

http://cs.anu.edu.au/~bdm/dilugim/moby.html

 

 

Did you read this document??

 

Let me show you the caveat @ the bottom .....

 

"A note to the credulous

It has come to my attention that some people have taken this page as claiming that Moby Dick really predicted the assassinations of famous people. Please be assured that none of these patterns happened by other than pure random chance."

 

What did I say in my post to Connor......My Comment:  "I'm sure based on just probability and your convention, people can come up with alot of "alleged" codes in just about any document."

 

 

So they just conjured up something in other words.....

 

Hey Letters they make words....Words mean something.

 

How does this compare to the Torah Code??

 

What was the Template/Convention/ Decoder they used?

 

I bet I could take any lengthy document and find all the American Made Pies in it.

 

This is Laughable Neb

 

Enoch, I was just presenting what was being referred to. I wasn't making a claim with it. No need to jump down my throat.

[Enoch2021]

 

Would you like me to elucidate the "Elephant in the Room" Logic Flaw with your parallel?

 

Are you saying that GOD "authored":  Moby Dick, War and Peace and the Koran to name a few??

 

Because..... for your point to be cogent, coherent, and relevant the answer to my question would have to be...Yes.  See the problem?

 

 

Moreover, even if there are "codes" in these other books.....does that preclude the Fact that GOD did it in HIS? 

 

Are you aware that "Coding" has been around for thousands of years?  Are you aware that One of (if not the) MAIN Reasons the Allies Defeated Germany/Japan in WW II was that they "Cracked" their respective codes.  In fact, up until the Battle of El Alamein the Allies were getting their respective "butts" kicked....what turned the TIDE.....

 

The ALLIES Cracked The CODES!!  As a Matter of Fact, the Allies never lost another Major Battle. 

 

 

A quick sidebar...you were giving CLB posting advice, I would like to do the same to you. If you are going to quote individual parts of a post separately, there is no reason to quote the post as a whole prior to doing that.  This make the thread harder to follow and almost impossible to do so on a mobile device.

 

Now, back to the topic...

 

I am not saying God was the author of those books, I am saying that God is not the author the the hidden codes because there are in fact no hidden codes.  Finding these codes in large amounts of letter is a type of Apophenia, people see patterns where none exist.  Statistically speaking they are expected in large groups of characters, but they happen by random chance and not design.   The reason Moby Dick predicted the death of Princes Di is not because Melville had the power to see the future, but because you can apply an algorithm to any large group of characters and find messages.    Did you find time to read the link I gave from the Institute of Mathematical Statistics?

In order for the idea that God put these codes into His Word is not supported unless it is unique to God's word, and it is not.

 

 

========================================================================================

 

 

A quick sidebar...you were giving CLB posting advice, I would like to do the same to you. If you are going to quote individual parts of a post separately, there is no reason to quote the post as a whole prior to doing that.  This make the thread harder to follow and almost impossible to do so on a mobile device.

 

Well when Worthy makes this site only accessible via Mobile Devices then I will change.  I also put in a Double Dotted Line Demarcation to let you know where my comments begin.  I also like to post the Whole Post just to let the reader know that I didn't just make the quotes up.

 

 

I am saying that God is not the author the the hidden codes because there are in fact no hidden codes.

 

Why, because you say so?

 

Statistically speaking they are expected in large groups of characters, but they happen by random chance and not design.

 

I already touched on this.  That would depend on the Decoder/Convention.  In my SPECIFIC case, it was a (7²) convention/template.  A little bit different than just a RANDOM Convention.  Please BE SPECIFIC when attempting to refute specific subjects.

 

 

Did you find time to read the link I gave from the Institute of Mathematical Statistics?

 

No I actually didn't since I know statistics rather well......Man, I hated those classes LOL.

 

That also brings me to another point.  Did you know on some sites, just posting a link and a sentence like "Check This" will get you BANNED.  Please.... you read it, confirm Veracity yourself and pull out the specific points you want to "Hang Your Hat ON" and defend them specifically.  Just posting a link...and saying "here" is laughable.

 

 

In order for the idea that God put these codes into His Word is not supported unless it is unique to God's word, and it is not.

 

Preposterous.  Why?  Are you saying that just because People use "Codes" that precludes the Fact that GOD did or could?  That's Non-Sequitur on steroids.

[Enoch2021]

 

 

It was after.   Do you have some kind of a point lurking here?

 

 

Are you saying that since I didn't notice it personally then it must not be True? 

 

Are you saying that since I personally failed to recognize the fact ...that it should be dismissed? 

 

Conceptually.....if I, on my Quest for TRUTH, come across connections/parallels/ or discover things that I never contemplated personally.... I should summarily disregard them? 

 

 

So when I was 4 or 5 years old and I was attempting to tie my shoes (which all resulted in knots  ) .... I should not have listened to my Mother and watched her demonstrate the appropriate technique; because......I personally, didn't think of it? 

 

 

Are these the "Serious" questions that you needed answers to??

 

 

The point is that maybe you didn't see it because it was not there.  Reading the text does not make on think of a cross until you see the picture, then you go "oh yea".  Perhaps that is because there is no cross in the text

 

The power of suggestion is very powerful.  It is why 10,000 people will see Jesus on burnt toast or hear "turn me on dead man" when listening to the Beatles backwards.

 

As for your shoe tying, despite your admiration for 7th grade text books I would hope you have progressed since then. 

 

 

 

 

========================================================================================

 

 

The point is that maybe you didn't see it because it was not there.  Reading the text does not make on think of a cross until you see the picture, then you go "oh yea".  Perhaps that is because there is no cross in the text

 

That's Your point??.....Please, Please tell me it's not. 

 

Maybe because the Bible is not a Picture Book.

 

 

It is why 10,000 people will see Jesus on burnt toast or hear "turn me on dead man" when listening to the Beatles backwards.

 

And this is relevant to what exactly?

 

 

As for your shoe tying, despite your admiration for 7th grade text books I would hope you have progressed since then.

 

It quite apparent I will have to lower the standard down to 2nd grade textbooks with some posters 

[Enoch2021]

 

 

For reference, these were the "codes" found in Moby Dick:

 

http://cs.anu.edu.au/~bdm/dilugim/moby.html

 

 

Did you read this document??

 

Let me show you the caveat @ the bottom .....

 

"A note to the credulous

It has come to my attention that some people have taken this page as claiming that Moby Dick really predicted the assassinations of famous people. Please be assured that none of these patterns happened by other than pure random chance."

 

What did I say in my post to Connor......My Comment:  "I'm sure based on just probability and your convention, people can come up with alot of "alleged" codes in just about any document."

 

 

So they just conjured up something in other words.....

 

Hey Letters they make words....Words mean something.

 

How does this compare to the Torah Code??

 

What was the Template/Convention/ Decoder they used?

 

I bet I could take any lengthy document and find all the American Made Pies in it.

 

This is Laughable Neb

 

Enoch, I was just presenting what was being referred to. I wasn't making a claim with it. No need to jump down my throat.

 

 

 

Neb, I wasn't jumping down your throat....and, I do appreciate that you did.  Sorry, I should have said that.

 

I emphasize (Bold/different colors/ fonts et al) just to HIGHLIGHT and separate out concepts so they stand apart and are easily recognizable.  There are no emotions attached to it unless,  I do This.......!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[LookingForAnswers]

Well when Worthy makes this site only accessible via Mobile Devices then I will change.  I also put in a Double Dotted Line Demarcation to let you know where my comments begin.  I also like to post the Whole Post just to let the reader know that I didn't just make the quotes up.

 

A person can read up the thread to see the quotes are valid.  By repeating entire post twice in your one post you make the thread 3 times longer than it needs to be.  Why is that necessary?

 

Why, because you say so?

 

 

No, because it has been shown that they occur without any intelligence behind them.  This has been proven time and time again. So now, the onus is on you to prove the codes you speak of are the result God and not random chance. 

 

I already touched on this.  That would depend on the Decoder/Convention.  In my SPECIFIC case, it was a (7²) convention/template.  A little bit different than just a RANDOM Convention.  Please BE SPECIFIC when attempting to refute specific subjects.

 

 

different conventions give you different answers. They are all the result of randomness.

 

 

No I actually didn't since I know statistics rather well......Man, I hated those classes LOL.

 

 

So a science expert and a stats one, very impressive.    Not sure why that would keep you from read the paper.  Perhaps you expertise in statistics let you know that you would not be able to question the paper and it would end your little cosmic code experiment. 

 

 

 

 

That also brings me to another point.  Did you know on some sites, just posting a link and a sentence like "Check This" will get you BANNED.  Please.... you read it, confirm Veracity yourself and pull out the specific points you want to "Hang Your Hat ON" and defend them specifically.  Just posting a link...and saying "here" is laughable.

 

 

Well when Worthy makes that rule I will change. 

 

Preposterous.  Why?  Are you saying that just because People use "Codes" that precludes the Fact that GOD did or could?  That's Non-Sequitur on steroids.

 

 

Because the codes have been shown to result without design.  In order for you to claim they are part of a design you would need to show why these are different than the ones that occur by chance.  You have not done that.

[Enoch2021]

 

Please show one, Like this......

I agree that these kinds of Codes have more validity to them than the Codes revealing current world events.

But while these things are very fascinating and enlightening, using them for "proof" just opens the door to skepticism. If a person can't believe the unhidden prophecies of Messiah's birth, death, and resurrection being fulfilled in Jesus, why would they be convinced by these things?

 

 

 

 

============================================================================================

 

 

I agree that these kinds of Codes have more validity to them than the Codes revealing current world events.

 

It's the Technique/Convention (7²) of Decoding the Cypher and the Product that are the COMPELLING FACTORS in this specific case.

 

 

But while these things are very fascinating and enlightening, using them for "proof" just opens the door to skepticism.

 

How in the World would I attempt to PROVE "CODES" in Scripture without Showing the Specific "CODES" in Scripture??

 

As I said, when I first heard of this concept....I don't think I could have been anymore Skeptical.  And as I also said, The very fact that I posted the topic inherently invites skepticism...that's the reason I posted it.  However....as I also mentioned, if the Refutee brings a sound, reasoned (preferably SUPPORTED, depending on topic) to the discussion.... I'm fine with it.  It's a WIN WIN situation.  Refute it ------ one less thing     Confirm it and it Blesses You then

 

 

If a person can't believe the unhidden prophecies of Messiah's birth, death, and resurrection being fulfilled in Jesus, why would they be convinced by these things?

 

I agree.  My target audience was for more "seasoned" members of the WORD.   Point taken

[LookingForAnswers]

 

 

That's Your point??.....Please, Please tell me it's not. 

 

Maybe because the Bible is not a Picture Book.

 

 

 

you are a slippery eel that's for sure.  The point is the text does not suggest a cross, that is why when you read it you didn't think of it this way.  It was not till someone else put the thought into your head that you decided the text did indeed support a cross. 

 

And this is relevant to what exactly?

 

 

It is relevant because you seeing a cross in Numbers 2 is the same as people seeing Jesus on toast. They don't see it till someone tells them it is there, then their mind adjust to see it.
 

 

It quite apparent I will have to lower the standard down to 2nd grade textbooks with some posters

 

 

You mean you weren't already?  Could have fooled me!

[Enoch2021]

 

Well when Worthy makes this site only accessible via Mobile Devices then I will change.  I also put in a Double Dotted Line Demarcation to let you know where my comments begin.  I also like to post the Whole Post just to let the reader know that I didn't just make the quotes up.

 

A person can read up the thread to see the quotes are valid.  By repeating entire post twice in your one post you make the thread 3 times longer than it needs to be.  Why is that necessary?

 

Why, because you say so?

 

 

No, because it has been shown that they occur without any intelligence behind them.  This has been proven time and time again. So now, the onus is on you to prove the codes you speak of are the result God and not random chance. 

 

I already touched on this.  That would depend on the Decoder/Convention.  In my SPECIFIC case, it was a (7²) convention/template.  A little bit different than just a RANDOM Convention.  Please BE SPECIFIC when attempting to refute specific subjects.

 

 

different conventions give you different answers. They are all the result of randomness.

 

 

No I actually didn't since I know statistics rather well......Man, I hated those classes LOL.

 

 

So a science expert and a stats one, very impressive.    Not sure why that would keep you from read the paper.  Perhaps you expertise in statistics let you know that you would not be able to question the paper and it would end your little cosmic code experiment. 

 

 

 

 

That also brings me to another point.  Did you know on some sites, just posting a link and a sentence like "Check This" will get you BANNED.  Please.... you read it, confirm Veracity yourself and pull out the specific points you want to "Hang Your Hat ON" and defend them specifically.  Just posting a link...and saying "here" is laughable.

 

 

Well when Worthy makes that rule I will change. 

 

Preposterous.  Why?  Are you saying that just because People use "Codes" that precludes the Fact that GOD did or could?  That's Non-Sequitur on steroids.

 

 

Because the codes have been shown to result without design.  In order for you to claim they are part of a design you would need to show why these are different than the ones that occur by chance.  You have not done that.

 

 

 

======================================================================================

 

 

No, because it has been shown that they occur without any intelligence behind them.  This has been proven time and time again. So now, the onus is on you to prove the codes you speak of are the result God and not random chance.

 

Time and Time again, eh?  Like where and what?  So now you want to shift the Burden of Proof?  LOL  I already showed you......

 

 

 

So your refutation is there are names in Moby Dick       You wouldn't happen to be Pre-Law, would ya?

 

 

They are all the result of randomness

.

So the 7² Decoder is Random, eh?

 

 

Not sure why that would keep you from read the paper.  Perhaps you expertise in statistics let you know that you would not be able to question the paper and it would end your little cosmic code experiment.

 

Whatever helps you sleep @ night.  And I gave you a very good reason.

 

Well when Worthy makes that rule I will change.

 

Well, then I will continue to ignore them.  See this differs in the "Post Structure" issue that you have which is just a mere logistical issue.  ("Just Posting Links")...This speaks to Personal Character and Intellectual Integrity, IMHO

 

 

In order for you to claim they are part of a design you would need to show why these are different than the ones that occur by chance.  You have not done that.

 

I did........ 7²

[EnochBethany]

This subject has been coming up with Great Frequency and IMHO has "Muddied the Waters" on several threads.  I think there is confusion of who "Penned" the Scriptures and the TRUE AUTHOR.

 

In NO WAY, SHAPE, or FORM am I Implying or Overtly attempting to cast a Disparaging Light on the Men That "Penned" GOD'S WORD, HE chose them for a reason..... and that's good enough for me 

 

I say GOD is the TRUE AUTHOR.....and this is my case:

 

 

First of ALL....

 

(2 Timothy 3:16) "All scripture is given by inspiration of God...."

 

GOD-BREATHED!!  Whats that tell you?

 

 

But I understand some need a little more meat.  As you know, both the Hebrew and Greek Alphabet have Numerical Values assigned to the letters; well................

 

Here's a couple GEMS:

 

If you take Genesis 1:1..... (In the beginning GOD created Heaven and the Earth.)  Then take the (number of the Letters and multiply that times the product of the Letters) then Divide that by the (number of the Words times the product of the Words) you get........ 3.1416 (Pi)

 

Strange but ok, could be just randomness or nothing.

But lets take a look @ the 2nd Major Creation Verse in the Bible which happens to be in the New Testament and in Greek.......Greek Letters also have numerical values.  John 1:1: ( In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with GOD, and the Word was GOD).  Do the same thing.....(number of the Letters and multiply that times the product of the Letters) then Divide that by the (number of the Words times the product of the Words).  Guess what you get:.......... 2.7182 ("e")!!

 

"e"......Napierian Logarithm or LOG to the base "e".  This limiting value is 2.7182818285.

This number shows up everywhere in mathematics:  Wave Mechanics, Electrical Theory, Advanced Math, Distribution of Prime Numbers, Theory of Probability., Pure Theory of Numbers..etc.)  Oh...and "e" wasn't discovered until the 17th CENTURY!!

 

Coincidence huh? ....The 2 Main Creation Verses in the BIBLE = The Basic Constants in the Entire UNIVERSE!!!

 

 

The GENEALOGY IN GENESIS 5:  Unlike "American" names, Hebrew Names mean something .   Did Moses Contrive this? ............

 

 

 

WOW!!!!!!   PRAISE THE LORD!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

 

 

Got another "Jaw Dropper" from Numbers 2:

GOD gave Moses specific instructions on how to set up their camp around the Tabernacle while wondering in the wilderness.  By taking the numbers within each tribe (there were three tribes in each of the 4 camps) and placing per GOD'S INSTRUCTIONS.....if you could fly over the camp, this is what you would see.....

 

 

 

 

WOW!!!!!!!!!!  How May Years Before the Cross Was Numbers Written???   PRAISE THE LORD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

 

 

 

Equidistant Letter Sequencing:  Coding System

 

This is pretty amazing....

 

 

 

Taking (Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy)  Using 49 (7²) sequences, Genesis shown to Illustrate Technique.....

 

 

 

 

YOU Get........

 

 

 

You get Nothing in Leviticus using the Technique.......BUT WAIT :

 

 

 

 

......

 

 

 

 

I think we're a bit beyond coincidence!!    Did Moses contrive this?  Or, did Moses receive the text LETTER BY LETTER??  Your Call!!  PRAISE THE LORD!!!!!

 

 

(Proverbs 25:2) "It is the glory of God to conceal a thing: but the honour of kings is to search out a matter."

 

**(All Slides above Courtesy of Dr. Chuck Missler)**

 

 

In closing:  if you have ALOT of spare time, Look up Dr. Ivan Panin.

Graduated from Harvard, PhD in Mathematics in 1882. In 1890...discovered the Heptadic Structure underlying Biblical Text.  He generated 43,000 pages over 50 years....buckle your Seatbelt!!!  There's some Mind Blowing Gems in there...........

 

 

GOD IS THE TRUE AUTHOR OF THE BIBLE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

He even chose Caiaphas to prophesy once, but I know of no

reason to do fanciful numerology or "codes."

Edited February 23, 2014 by EnochBethany