Chris
Since you are *assuming* the very thing to be proved, this is hardly
significant. And, again, such "unique" numerical attributes apply to
nearly anything, because there are so *many* of them. And, also, you still
show no reason why, even if there *are* special features of the opening
words of the Bible, we should think that they have anything to do with God
rather than simply the authors of the passages used. In short, none of the
critical logical links have been made between the facts used and the
conclusion that God exists.
Here's the first sentence from an article on choosing the right paper for
desktop publishing:
Choosing which paper or card to print your project on is
one of the most important decisions in the printing process.
This is only one sentence, but I can see a number of numerical things we
can do with it that would all have the significance of your findings
regarding the Bible -- that is, no significance at all. For example, if we
translate the letters into numbers by simply replacing each letter with the
number of its position in the alphabet, we get a string of numbers. If we
add up all the digits in each word, we get another string of smaller
numbers. If we add up all the digits in the sentence, we get another
number. If you multiply all the numbers together, you get another number.
We can make a string of numbers out of the positions of the vowels in each
word. We can make a string of the numbers of letters in each word. We can
make another string of the number of consonants in each word, and yet
another for the vowels. We can make yet another for the number of syllables
in each word, and so on.
This is just the beginning. If you can't find dozens of "remarkable" and
"rare" numeric occurrences in such a collection of numbers, then you just
ain't tryin'.
Your results mean nothing much at all, except that you persisted in
searching out nice numeric relationships until you found a bunch of them.
At 11:37 PM 10/01/2000, you wrote:
>Reflectorites:
>
>Before addressing the comments of my detractors* re my claim that from
>the numerics underlying the Bible's opening words, we may infer a
>supernatural origin - and much more beside! - I thought it appropriate
>to suggest a scenario that might elucidate the situation, as we find it:
>
>For the sake of argument let us assume that - concerning his being,
>omnipotence, omniscience and omnipresence - the Bible provides us with
>an introductory and correct assessment of our Creator. Then, bearing in
>mind the present state of the world (including the widespread unbelief,
>and much confusion as to what the Bible actually says), we might
>reasonably conclude that he would take extraordinary measures to protect
>the Bible - his word to man.
>
>We observe that every Hebrew and Greek word of the original documents
>which were to form the basis of all our Bible translations is also
>fairly, and naturally, interpretable as a number - this, by virtue of
>the fact that these peoples adopted schemes of alphabetic numeration
>during the closing centuries BC. Clearly, the same cannot be claimed for
>the majority of other texts; so a problem arises. How can some arbitrary
>scheme for converting words to numbers command general respect?!
>
>The biblical author - when he transmitted his words to Moses (c 1500 BC)
>- having at his command a preview of the such developments, might easily
>(for we have assumed his omnipotence) have built further information
>into these words - for the 'numeric channel' would be there, ready and
>waiting, many centuries down the line! But, what of the content of this
>'supporting' package? Clearly, to carry any weight with a largely
>unbelieving but very knowledgeable intelligentsia, the need would be
>either, (a) to pepper the whole book with arresting features (after the
>ELS manner) and/or, (b) to focus essentially on the opening words, and
>clothe them with a unique numerical structure. But, you will ask, of
>what might 'a unique numerical structure' consist?
>
>The combination of number and form is, potentially, very powerful in
>that it is comparatively rare, completely independent of time and place,
>and immune to tampering.. Furthermore, such a structure is capable of
>being widely understood - for virtually all are able to count and
>recognise association by visual symmetry. In my paper "The Lamp" -
>available online at
>
> http://homepage.virgin.net/vernon.jenkins/Symb.htm
>
> - I draw attention to the self-evidently unique properties of 37 and
>91 - the difference and sum, respectively, of the cubes of 4 and 3 (ie
>64 and 27). The first of these and its digit reverse (ie 73) are,
>respectively, 12th and 21st primes; the matching reflection in their
>order numbers is unique among the 13 million prime pairs examined; the
>product 37x73 is 2701 - 73rd triangle, and the sum of the 7 words of
>Gn.1:1; this triangle has an outline of 216, or 6x6x6 - a unique cube
>(superficial area is numerically the same, ie 6x6x6 units); 37 and 73
>are closely related geometrically (as the material at the foregoing URL
>demonstrates). The triangle representing the sum of the first 8 words
>is the 77th (ie 3003); this has 91 as a factor.
>
>A cursory examination of the biblical text reveals that the cube is a
>symbol of holiness (see 1Kings 6:20 and Rev.21:16). The presence of the
>foregoing cubes is therefore apposite to this context, as are the
>equilateral triangles - symbols of the coequal Trinity: Father, Son and
>Holy Spirit.
>
>The choice of numerical material here in the Bible's opening words -
>together with such connotations - is, I submit, sufficiently remarkable
>to draw the earnest seeker of truth to consider the many other attendant
>details more closely. (These are available online at the URLs given
>below.)
>
>In conclusion, I suggest the foregoing scenario is close to the truth of
>the matter. However, I would be interested to hear the views of others
>who - having examined the details I have provided - are able to offer a
>more reasonable explanation of the Gn.1:1 phenomena. Clearly, the claim
>I am making invites a solid rebuttal from those with atheistic leanings!
>
>In anticipation,
>
>Vernon
>
>Vernon Jenkins MSc
>[musician, mining engineer, and formerly Senior Lecturer in Maths and
>Computing, the Polytechnic of Wales (now the University of Glamorgan)]
>http://homepage.virgin.net/vernon.jenkins/index.htm
>http://www.compulink.co.uk/~indexer/miracla1.htm
>
>* in a further posting
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Oct 01 2000 - 21:34:34 EDT