I am sorry but I find your treatment of the Bible misguided and offensive. I
did once refer your work to the unrude and not unlearned and got a ribald
The bible is to make us wise unto salvation and not teach silly myths.
I am sure your time would be better spent teaching the bible in a run down
Welsh church or chapel (tautologous as most are run-down as the church is
very weak in Wales.) and do so simply - "Tell me the stories of Jesus " etc
There is a right and a wrong use of our intellect to understand our faith. I
am afraind that my Welsh Churchwarden would say your work is "hen glonc" -
North Welsh for old rubbish or something similar.
Yours as a simple bible-believing Christian
Michael (IQ in single figures)
----- Original Message -----
From: "Vernon Jenkins" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
To: "M.B.Roberts" <email@example.com>
Sent: Thursday, June 21, 2001 1:19 AM
Subject: Re: Watershed
> I take your point about the Bible being for the 'rude and unlearned'.
> However, presumably they believe what they read! This cannot be said of
> the sophisticated and learned, as I think you must agree. I believe that
> it is to such as these that the numerical phenomena are directed. And
> while you may not personally be readily conversant with these constants
> (which are principally of interest to mathematicians, scientists and
> engineers), I believe you are capable of responding positively to the
> extreme unlikelihood of such famous entities appearing in Gen.1:1 and
> John 1:1.
> My hope is that you have not rendered yourself unteachable in respect of
> the scriptures. The letters and words of the Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek
> originals really do have an uncontrived numerical dimension - though I
> doubt that this would be stressed in any Bible college; possibly, not
> even mentioned! As I see it, these numbers which underpin the text were
> as much planned by God as the words themselves; the evidence of that
> fact is apparent in the numerical phenomena associated with the Bible's
> first verse. Significantly, by so doing, the Creator has provided the
> Bible with self-authenticating powers - apparent only to those who will
> allow reason to be their guide!
> May I suggest that no Christian should throw his intellect overboard
> when confronted with self-evident truths that appear to threaten his
> By the way, I happen to be Welsh.
> M.B.Roberts wrote:
> > Is this pi in the sky?
> > More seriously this quasimathematical eisegesis makes mockery of the
> > word of God. As Calvin wrote Moses wrote for the "rude and unlearned" in
> > other words thick idiots like me. I can understand that " in the
> > God made the heavens and the earth" but I am simply too thick to even
> > to understand all this about pi and e.
> > I also have to preach to the Welsh so I have to be simple but they are
> > thicker than the English or Americans.
> > Michael
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "John W Burgeson" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> > To: <email@example.com>; <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> > Sent: Wednesday, June 20, 2001 9:49 PM
> > Subject: Re: Watershed
> > > >> the Hebrew words of Genesis 1:1 deliver a value for the fundamental
> > > constant
> > > 'pi' correct to 5 significant figures (underestimating the true value
> > > a mere 0.0012%). Precisely the same procedure applied to the Greek of
> > > John 1:1 yields an estimate of Euler's number, 'e', also correct to 5
> > > significant figures (overestimating the true value by 0.0011%)>>
> > >
> > > So God is an imperfect mathematician? He underestimates pi and
> > > overestimates e?
> > >
> > > Sorry.
> > >
> > > John Burgeson (Burgy)
> > >
> > > www.burgy.50megs.com
> > > (science/theology, quantum mechanics, baseball, ethics,
> > > humor, cars, God's intervention into natural causation, etc.)
> > >
> > >
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Jun 21 2001 - 04:09:35 EDT