Re: Numerical Significance? (was The "Apparent" Trap)

From: FMAJ1019@aol.com
Date: Wed Sep 27 2000 - 22:39:05 EDT

  • Next message: FMAJ1019@aol.com: "Re: Selection as "a Profoundly Informative Intervention" #1"

    In a message dated 9/27/2000 5:25:01 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
    vernon.jenkins@virgin.net writes:

    << Clearly, your limited survey of the material I have put online has been
    insufficient to experience the full impact of what I am attempting to
    convey. [Your suggestion that such a confluence of unique and
    coordinated numerical geometries and symbolisms in a significant passage
    of text is relatively commonplace is completely without foundation, I'm
    afraid!] But, allow me to elaborate a little:
    >>

    I'd suggest that you show us that the numerical geometries and symbolisms are
    indeed not a common place. As the Bible Code for instance has shown, it is
    quite easy to find 'hidden messages' in texts, messages that are nothing more
    than a figment of our imaginative mind. Are these structures indeed more than
    just a coincidence? Have you such research to show this?

    Chris, I suggest that it would be foolish to lightly shrug off these

    << 'coincidences' (and there are very many more!) as being merely the
    products of chance. In their entirety - and keeping in mind their
    >>

    Until shown otherwise, it would be foolish to consider these 'coincidences'
    more than just chance.

    a<< ssociation with the significant opening words of a large book (which
    claims for itself 'divine inspiration'!) - they amount to a strongly
    persuasive argument for the truth of Genesis 1:1, and for the wider
    truths contained between the Bible's covers.
    >>

    The Bible does not need numerology for its message.

    << Many have set the course of their lives on greatly inferior evidences! -
    wouldn't you agree?
    >>

    True but in science such endeavours have often lead to disappointments. That
    we in our spiritual life are less constrained to look at 'evidence' and
    'coincidences' and marvel at the 'design' does not mean that we can be that
    sloppy in science.



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Sep 27 2000 - 22:39:29 EDT