A Second Channel of Communication?

[Donn]

In the opening line, I stumble. A problem so apparent to me, an ill-educated moron who cannot math, that I wonder how the author managed to continue typing. Perhaps it was some momentum of conviction.

Here is the line:

"Within the infinite set of whole numbers we find just one which overshadows all others in respect of its many remarkable properties."

My impediment is the juxtaposition of "infinite" and "just one" — one does not befit the other.

Can't touch this.

 

[blue triangle]

A neutral mind says that with an infinite sequence of numbers, all sorts of funny things will occur.

However, let's take it the other way around:

Numbers is one of the most factual things we have. 3 is three, no matter how we count it or what kind of things we use it to denote. 4 is 3+2, 2 is 3-2. ... bear with me a few seconds more...

So we start counting things, say pepples. 1, 2, 3, .... 1000, 1001, .... 2699, 2700, ... and what comes next? 2701. It HAS to be there. It was not inserted by some intelligence, it is simply needed in the sequence, how else would we count to 2702?

Hans

Where did you learn arithmetic?

Yes, it had to sum to a number, but the number the first verse happens to sum to is a particularly interesting one. Doesn't that strike you as curious? Not only that but this is only the beginning . . .

 

[blue triangle]

Evidence of a mind gaming psychopathic mass murdering monster!

The god of the bible would be a horrific creature to attend, if it were real.

Actions trump numerological game playing every time, and the actions of the monster god shout psychopathy. Even new testament torture and sacrifice of himself/his son is black magic mind ****.

Fortunately science pretty well shows with a thousand demonstrations that such a creature is impossible, and isn't extant in this universe.

Thank your lucky stars, and walk free. Free! Get it?

What has any of that got to do with whether or not God exists? The patterns are real or they are not!

And your rather skewed reading of scripture (which sounds as if it came straight from the pages of The God Delusion) is nothing less than creating the ultimate straw man, and in the laziest way possible.

 

[Donn]

What has any of that got to do with whether or not God exists?

'Syd was saying god does not exist. You are welcome.

The patterns are real or they are not!

Indeed. The conviction that the pattern is evidence for what you claim is the problem.

 

[blue triangle]

So is the second verse. And the third verse. And the 22nd verse. And the 44th paragraph of any book ever written. Look, and you will find patterns everywhere. As long as you don't specify in advance the particular pattern you expect to find, of course.



By the fact that it applies to everything, including that verse.

Yes, the patterns were discovered after the fact. But anything you find then try to understand was discovered after the fact. From finding patterns in the divine prologue, Vernon Jenkins looked elsewhere, predicting that verses like John 1.1, similar in importance and meaning, would also contain patterns. And he was right, hypothesis confirmed.

Yes, every verse is full of numbers, from which by ingenious calculations estimates of any constant could be found. But there are certain features of this phenomenon that are locked in, and therefore unchangeable. Multiply the letter values by the number of letters, then divide by the word values multiplied by the number of words and you have the first 5 digits of pi (error 1 in 90000). Repeat exactly the same procedure with John 1.1. And you obtain e, again with an error of 1 in 90000). They are equal and opposite too, so summing gives almost complete cancellation. John 1.1 sums to 3627, a plinth upon which triangle 2701 sits to give triangle 6328, 112th triangle. YHVH Elohim is 112.

 

[Donn]

Multiply the letter values by the number of letters, then divide by the word values multiplied by the number of words..

For select letter values and select divisions. Seek and find and so forth.

 

[blue triangle]

The Woo is strong in this thread.

May the woo be with you.

 

[blue triangle]

I think you may be mistaken.

I also think my think is more realistic than your think.

You think? Then you need to think about your think, I think.

 

[Donn]

May the woo be with you.

You think? Then you need to think about your think, I think.

You are displaying the timidity of your convictions.

 

[blue triangle]

Why?
Seriously.

And not only that, but how do you rule out the (string) possibility of spotting something in that verse because you want it to be in that verse? In other words, seeing a pattern that is simply a product of your imagination.

The opening words of a book such as the Bible, in this case a statement of our ultimate origins, is obviously of great import and meaning. Add to that its prime location and you have your answer. Where better to place the watermark?

I'm not going to repeat things I've written elsewhere on this thread, as I'm struggling with an iPad, so please take my comments as a whole.

 

[blue triangle]

You are displaying the timidity of your convictions.

And you are displaying the temerity of your concoctions.

 

[asydhouse]

What has any of that got to do with whether or not God exists? The patterns are real or they are not!

And your rather skewed reading of scripture (which sounds as if it came straight from the pages of The God Delusion) is nothing less than creating the ultimate straw man, and in the laziest way possible.

My understanding of scripture comes from having read the bloody stuff, thought about it, and realised it's all a crock of nonsense, to be polite. My educated mind can see the fallacies you are wallowing in.

I was attempting to be as concise as possible, so maybe you just don't get what I'm trying to tell you. Which is, be careful what you wish for (which is all you are doing here with this numerological pattern-seeking and finding, the dangers of naive operation of the human brain, wishing for a god to be, fishing in the murky polluted waters of a text that's been translated so many times from a completely different form, as Delvo's scholarship should show you if you weren't already blinded by the light you are projecting onto or into the text you are worshipping so esoterically).

Never mind the God Delusion, you obviously are oblivious to its wisdom (I had realised the pathetic twistedness of the xtian religion long before Dawkins pleasured me with his far superior text), try looking into this book:

How to Think About Weird Things: Critical Thinking For a New Age by Theodore Schick, Jr. and Lewis Vaughn.

It's an eye-opener, and far more useful to your personal enlightenment than this nonsense you are enamoured of just now. Seriously. Learn how the brain works, and how we are fooled by it. Fascinating stuff, and far more likely to lead to your happiness than leading yourself up the garden path (or worse being led by those who are looking to exploit your gullibility).

Seriously.

 

[blue triangle]

This doesn't mean what you think it means, clearly.

I think that seeing patterns in numbers as of anything other than mathematical significance is perhaps evidence of gross gullibility, and of the phenomena of seeing what you want to see.

I said it was evidence first to because it isn't proof, secondly, because the patterns need some kind of explanation. Coincidence is laughable, especially when you discover what else is in there.

The phenomena of seeing what you want to see works both ways, as does that of being gullible. Why gullibility too? Not everyone wants there to be a God.

 

[blue triangle]

My understanding of scripture comes from having read the bloody stuff, thought about it, and realised it's all a crock of nonsense, to be polite. My educated mind can see the fallacies you are wallowing in.

I was attempting to be as concise as possible, so maybe you just don't get what I'm trying to tell you. Which is, be careful what you wish for (which is all you are doing here with this numerological pattern-seeking and finding, the dangers of naive operation of the human brain, wishing for a god to be, fishing in the murky polluted waters of a text that's been translated so many times from a completely different form, as Delvo's scholarship should show you if you weren't already blinded by the light you are projecting onto or into the text you are worshipping so esoterically).

Never mind the God Delusion, you obviously are oblivious to its wisdom (I had realised the pathetic twistedness of the xtian religion long before Dawkins pleasured me with his far superior text), try looking into this book:

How to Think About Weird Things: Critical Thinking For a New Age by Theodore Schick, Jr. and Lewis Vaughn.

It's an eye-opener, and far more useful to your personal enlightenment than this nonsense you are enamoured of just now. Seriously. Learn how the brain works, and how we are fooled by it. Fascinating stuff, and far more likely to lead to your happiness than leading yourself up the garden path (or worse being led by those who are looking to exploit your gullibility).

Seriously.

You sound like a young person. I haven't the time to give this the reply it is itching for, but I'll come back to it.

 

[The Norseman]

Are you assuming I would only defend the Christian concept of God? Better to assume nothing, I suggest.

I dare say that it's not an assumption but a conclusion based on your posting history, open to revision as time goes on.

 

[The Norseman]

Yes, the patterns were discovered after the fact. But anything you find then try to understand was discovered after the fact. From finding patterns in the divine prologue, Vernon Jenkins looked elsewhere, predicting that verses like John 1.1, similar in importance and meaning, would also contain patterns. And he was right, hypothesis confirmed.

I predict that patterns are to be found in the Poetic Edda as well as the Prose Edda. I can therefore conclude that I'm right, hypothesis confirmed.

And you are displaying the temerity of your concoctions.

Quite the ironic statement, that.

 

[Donn]

The opening words of a book such as the Bible, in this case a statement of our ultimate origins, is obviously of great import and meaning.

Whatever gives you the notion that the Bible is about ultimate origins; any more than other such tales? What should I, or anyone, be worried about what you find of import?

Add to that its prime location and you have your answer. Where better to place the watermark?

Leaving the theme of your trembling goosebumps, here you display prominent confirmation bias: you declare the location primary and thus a watermark is inevitable. You inject the importance into both ends of an hermetic hermeneutic.

And you are displaying the temerity of your concoctions.

Wherewith you continue your cowardly streak. Engage with criticism, or confess that you're here to evangelize.

 

[John Nowak]

My parents' phone number not only spells out a phrase in English, but it is the numerator of a rational number that gives the ratio between two common units of measurement.

Therefore, magic.

 

[blue triangle]

Not really. When you first discover your first example of numerology & wishful patternizing, it might seem impressive. Once you've seen several more, you start noticing how they're all the same.

Because there are so many numbers that people could find something "special" about, that any sentence-length string of numero-letters has a decent chance of hitting one of those numbers. The odds of an author hitting one of those numbers randomly weren't one in a quadrillion or one in a million or even one in thousands; probably more like one in a dozen. It's unusual but nothing outlandish.

Worse yet, the Hebrew sentence we're looking at was not written in its original form, either phonetically or theologically. By the time it got written down in that particular form and locked, people had already been reciting the same or slightly different things for years, and we have some of the older writings to show how this one's language and ideas both gradually developed from predecessors. So if there was a time at which God whispered something in someone's brain, it must have been earlier than this, which means this verse can not possibly be its direct result.

That's starting with the conclusion and looking for excuses for it.

To answer your last question first, I think I was talking about the fact that the patterns are in the first verse, and not some verse in the middle of the Bible. I don't think it's too much to see meaning in that, because if you tested every verse in the Bible you almost certainly would find striking patterns somewhere.

Yes, textual analysis has shown that Genesis was edited many times. However, you are presupposing (and I've seen a lot of presupposition so far in the replies) that only the original words 'whispered' would be the encrypted ones. I suggest it was a teleological process, Guided by a force spanning space and time towards a desired end point. I believe that these patterns were meant to be discovered now.

 

[Cat Not Included]

So out of curiosity, for those who find mathematical "patterns" meaningful, let's say you came across a string of supposedly random numbers. Which of these strings would you find more meaning in?

223013162811155929224723231229274195182018292715282410308142927914161219648

1357111317192329313741434753596167717379838997101103107109113127131137139149151