Re: Watershed

From: Vernon Jenkins (
Date: Thu Jun 28 2001 - 18:22:20 EDT

  • Next message: John W Burgeson: "Re: Watershed"

    Hi Todd,

    In response to your original mail I had asked for some clarification of
    your question concerning "the same methodologies (found in) Douglas
    Adams' 'The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy' ". You have since replied
    as follows:

    > If this method (ie that of extracting 'pi' from Gen.1:1 and 'e' from
    > John 1:1) is genuine, then it can be formalized, and then you could
    > write a computer program, and then you could turn the program loose on
    > all kinds of material. What I have suggested is a very serious
    > exercise. What I suspect is that in doing the exercise you will
    > discover that the method does not show anything regarding divine
    > inspiration.

    May I kindly suggest that what you 'suspect' is neither here nor there,
    for such must be a subjective and inadequate evaluation that flies in
    the face of hard fact. Clearly, you have read my reply to George
    Murphy's final comments on the matter; am I to gather that you too are
    immune to the arguments that point incontrovertibly to supernatural
    process? Had you given some attention to the earlier material on my
    website you would have known that these latest findings are underwritten
    by a considerable groundswell of empirical data - these buttressed by
    apposite symbolism.

    > I'm not convinced enough that there is any value in such an exercise
    > to undertake the time and effort involved to do it. I'm highly
    > skeptical of the claim. Those who make the claim should implement it
    > in computer code, using a computer language like C or C++, then they
    > should provide the program, along with the source code, for anyone to
    > use to verify the claims that are made. And if it could then be
    > verified that this method worked on the Bible, and the Bible alone,
    > this would give independent verification of your claim.

    An ingenious way of attempting to get out of a tough spot! Where would
    such a process end? No, no. It's up to you, (or someone who feels
    equally nonplussed by the evidence I have presented) to provide an
    example that shows other texts (whose letters and words may be fairly
    read as numbers) beside the Bible display equally impressive features.
    When you feel ready to begin, please be assured of my full cooperation
    in providing your basic requirements.

    Todd, clearly you are a man who "...hears not Moses..." (Luke 16:31);
    indeed, one deeply committed to preaching a completely different
    message. However, hard fact points in a direction different from your
    own; it appears highly likely that Moses was right after all! Surely the
    time has now come for those of rational mind to follow the truth - no
    matter where it leads (period!) - for the alternative is intellectual



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Jun 28 2001 - 18:41:30 EDT