Re: Numerics (was Re: Comments on Snoke's approach)

From: Vernon Jenkins <vernon.jenkins@virgin.net>
Date: Wed Aug 17 2005 - 18:32:12 EDT

Randy,

Whilst I appreciate your prompt response to my recent initiative, it appears that you dismiss my thesis far too readily. As I see it, everything about these phenomena (which, you concede, are 'elegant and well crafted') speaks of purposeful design and intent. Here is my understanding of the background to their presence in the first two of the 31,102 verses of the Bible:

1) The proposition that the Creator would want to underwrite the truth of a statement that he foresaw would, one day, be flatly denied, or watered down, by the majority of the world's intellectual establishment seems eminently reasonable.

2) He would realise that to carry any weight with the clever folk of the 21st century - people largely hostile to his message - any such verifying principle would need to satisfy three important criteria, viz
  a.. it would need to be universal in its scope, i.e. be completey independent of language, of intellect, of time and of place

  b.. it would need to appeal strictly to self-evident truth and logical argument, i.e. no step of faith would be required to grasp its import

  c.. it would need to be decisive, i.e. leave no room for doubt that the Creator is its Author

3) Clearly, only the language of number can fulfil these exacting requirements. But how can the words of an ancient language lead, uniquely, to a meaningful set of numbers? By what generally-acceptable method can this first and crucial step be accomplished?
By arranging that, at the appointed time, Hebrew letters would also function as numerals!

And by what means can such numbers acquire a generally-acknowledged significance?

Simply by taking a prominent and absolute number structure as basis, and guiding the development of vocabulary, syntax and semantics to achieve coincidence with it!

4) Whether or not we believe that God plays such an active role in the affairs of mankind, we must surely face up to the implications of the empirical evidences presented in "Creation Geometries", and elsewhere on this website. And let us not overlook the fact that the principal object of our attention here, viz Genesis 1:1, is both a challenging and strategically-placed verse! It is indeed difficult to avoid the conclusion that these are all carefully co-ordinated features of purposeful design - intended to meet the demands of a desperate human situation.

I have referred to the foregoing development elsewhere as _A Theory of Divine Intent_ (TDI).

Randy, you concluded your email with the paragraph, "Rev. 13:18 is an intriguing verse and I certainly do not know what the proper interpretation is. But I believe I can bound the range of possibilities. At most, it implies that a person with wisdom would know that the "beast" has the characteristics conveyed by the symbolism represented by "666". No more."

I am not happy with certain modern translations which begin this verse with "This requires wisdom." - or words to that effect. What the original Greek actually says is "Here wisdom is." or, as the AV and NASB correctly have it, "Here is wisdom". In other words, wisdom is _being offered_ rather than _required_. I'm sure you will agree that that is an important distinction which fundamentally influences one's proper understanding of the verse. And regarding your "No more", the fact that 666 is uniquely triangular, has triangular NT companions in 153 and 276, and appears in triplicate in the numerical reading of Genesis 1:1, offer clear leads to its proper interpretation - and to the acquisition of wisdom.

Let me conclude by again quoting the question which prompted our present discussion. You asked, "How do we determine the dividing line between a pattern that can appear spontaneously, though with low probability, and a pattern that we all agree is derived from an agent transmitting a message?" I strongly believe I have provided you with a reasonable example of the latter. However, you may still disagree - in which case perhaps you would be good enough to indicate what essential ingredient you see is missing from my portfolio of empirical evidences.

With regards,

Vernon
www.otherbiblecode.com

  ----- Original Message -----
  From: Randy Isaac
  To: asa@calvin.edu
  Sent: Tuesday, August 16, 2005 2:49 AM
  Subject: Re: Numerics (was Re: Comments on Snoke's approach)

  Vernon,

      We have enough difficulty in detecting messages transmitted by human agents, let alone non-humans. As for messages from God, the only real revelation we have is Jesus Christ, God incarnate. We have the inspired written account of his life and God's dealing with his people. But detecting any other communication from God is not really a matter of "one's personal tolerance of coincidence." The 'watermarks' in your website are indeed elegant and well crafted, but their low probability of occurring at random does not make them a message from God.

      Rev. 13:18 is an intriguing verse and I certainly do not know what the proper interpretation is. But I believe I can bound the range of possibilities. At most, it implies that a person with wisdom would know that the "beast" has the characteristics conveyed by the symbolism represented by "666". No more.

      Randy
    ----- Original Message -----
    From: Vernon Jenkins
    To: Randy Isaac ; asa@calvin.edu
    Sent: Monday, August 15, 2005 6:44 PM
    Subject: Re: Numerics (was Re: Comments on Snoke's approach)

    Randy,

    You raised the question, "How do we determine the dividing line between a pattern that can appear spontaneously, though with low probability, and a pattern that we all agree is derived from an agent transmitting a message?" It seems to me that this largely depends upon one's personal tolerance of coincidence; however, reason suggests that this cannot be _unlimited_. A prime example arises in my own field of interest, viz the coordinated numerical geometries which inhabit the opening Hebrew words of Scripture. These present the atheist and skeptical believer alike with a major problem - for such is their intensity. I invite you to examine a concise pictorial account of these which you may find at http://homepage.virgin.net/tgvernon.jenkins/Astounding.htm

    You went on to say, "Some people use gematria or similar approaches to find numerical or other geometrical patterns in texts such as the Bible. They are persuaded that this is an indication of a message conveyed by an intelligent being. The only basis for their claim seems to be the low probability of such a pattern occurring and that the best explanation of that pattern is an intelligent author with divine skills. I don't find such arguments compelling, largely because they are a posteriori determinations of patterns without any a priori basis for believing an intelligent author intends to communicate in that manner." But the proof of the Lord's intention to communicate in this way is surely signalled in Revelation 13:18 - as I recently pointed out in "Balancing the Books" (http://homepage.virgin.net/tgvernon.jenkins/Balancing_Books.htm).

    Vernon
Received on Wed Aug 17 18:34:26 2005

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Wed Aug 17 2005 - 18:34:27 EDT