From: Ben ® 19/05/2001 20:33:03 Subject: Mathematical bible post id: 303410 i was told by a preist, when i told him i believed in science and numbers, that the bible is the only book that works out mathematiacaly. is this right and how??? From: Geraint ® 19/05/2001 20:35:47 Subject: re: Mathematical bible post id: 303411 Hi Ben - that sounds like complete and utter tosh.... Sorry mate. If you can present a single example, anything, we can disucss it further. From: Ben ® 19/05/2001 20:39:53 Subject: re: Mathematical bible post id: 303415 um sorry. i think in some language, letters are asigned numerical value. i think it was a priest trying to convince a kid to believe in a god. a god which i do believe in, but not in the conventional manor. From: Geraint ® 19/05/2001 20:42:59 Subject: re: Mathematical bible post id: 303416 Sigh - not this bible code nonsense again. You can do this with any big book of text, especially if you use ancient hebrew which does not use vowels.... Feel free to believe in your god, but it adds nothing to a scientific discussion to throw in supernatural powers. From: mick ® 19/05/2001 20:43:07 Subject: re: Mathematical bible post id: 303417 numbers are like words ,you can make them do whatever you want them to do ........even lie From: Boris ® 19/05/2001 20:46:30 Subject: re: Mathematical bible post id: 303418 I believe the Hasidic Jews assign number values to words etc, not sure of the details. From: Ben ® 19/05/2001 20:47:46 Subject: re: Mathematical bible post id: 303420 i thought it was nonsense. i wasn't bringing the god stuff into the arguement. that (the god stuff) is for another arguement. different god from other religions. any way, at this point in time, a god can explain as much as science in terms of the universe. i do not believe "god" created us. "he" may have created the universe (where did he come from, but i doubt he sat down and thought about us and created us esp. sorry about the god crap, but theology (thats what it is called?) is my specialty From: Geraint ® 19/05/2001 20:51:14 Subject: re: Mathematical bible post id: 303422 I really don't want to go down this road - but I don't think you need to invoke "god" when it comes to scientific cosmology. Cosmology is a science based on physics and works for the observed universe. If you want to invoke god for the origin of the universe, thats up to you.. but before the planck time its metaphysics, not physics. From: Ben ® 19/05/2001 20:58:53 Subject: re: Mathematical bible post id: 303427 it is cool. i am looking for answers. i am looking at all possibilities. if you dismiss any possibility without first exploring it, you could miss the answer. this is all new to me. you've probably done it all before and cum up with your answer or atleast figured in which direction the answert lies. From: Paul H. 19/05/2001 20:59:46 Subject: re: Mathematical bible post id: 303428 >>I believe the Hasidic Jews assign number values to words etc, not sure of the details. Every archaic Hebrew letter has a numeric value. Example "the": t =1, h = 2 e=3. The value of "the" is 1+2+3 = 6. The value of father = 1 ("aleph" - naturally, Men come first) The value of mother = 43 The value of child, is, wait for it, = 44. father + mother = child. Looks like science, don't it? But wait, there *is* more: The numeric value for the "Garden of Eden" is 233. The numeric value for the "Tree of Knowledge" (*in* the garden of Eden) is 144. These are two adjacent Fibonacci numbers. "If we are built from spirals, living *in* a spiral..." From: Ben ® 19/05/2001 21:02:14 Subject: re: Mathematical bible post id: 303430 so does the whole bible work out??? does it make a difference if the child is male or female?? From: Boris ® 19/05/2001 21:03:25 Subject: re: Mathematical bible post id: 303432 "Each letter in the alef-bet has a numerical value. These values can be used to write numbers, as the Romans used some of their letters (I, V, X, L, C, M) to represent numbers. Alef through Yod have the values 1 through 10. Yod through Qof have the values 10 through 100, counting by 10s. Qof through Tav have the values 100 through 400, counting by 100s. Final letters have the same value as their non-final counterparts. The number 11 would be rendered Yod-Alef, the number 12 would be Yod-Bet, the number 21 would be Kaf-Alef, the word Torah (Tav-Vav-Resh-Heh) has the numerical value 611, etc. The only significant oddity in this pattern is the number 15, which if rendered as 10+5 would be a name of G-d, so it is normally written Tet-Vav (9+6). Because of this system of assigning numerical values to letters, every word has a numerical value. There is an entire discipline of Jewish mysticism known as Gematria that is entirely devoted to finding hidden meanings in the numerical values of words. For example, the number 18 is very significant, because it is the numerical value of the word Chai, meaning life. Donations to Jewish charities are routinely made in denominations of 18 for that reason. From: http://www.baptist1.com/judaism/alephbet.htm From: Grant¹ (Avatar) 19/05/2001 21:03:29 Subject: re: Mathematical bible post id: 303433 we are built from spirals, living *in* a spiral..." "Like circle in a cirlce, like a wheel within a wheel..." The Windmills of Your Mind, from the orignal Thomas Crown Affair. From: Paul H. 19/05/2001 21:07:24 Subject: re: Mathematical bible post id: 303436 Ben, Dear Ben, >>so does the whole bible work out??? does it make a difference if the child is male or female?? It doesn't matter. A child is a child. But note these "Hasidic" Jews aren't analysing the Bible, they're going off their own version of if it, the "Torah" (the Jewish Bible). So it's not quite the same thing. I think it's hogwash. But you make up your *own* mind. From: Ben ® 19/05/2001 21:10:41 Subject: re: Mathematical bible post id: 303438 that is a possibility as well, pixies. but i doubt it. i know that using quantum and complex physics, all can be explained, until we get to the BB. before that....... on this forum i read something about energy coming form nothing, and if there is a big enough occurence of this energy, than matter can be permantly created. From: Geraint ® 19/05/2001 21:26:21 Subject: re: Mathematical bible post id: 303454 No - I see the Kabbalah for what it is - the Jewish view point on many aspects, such as universal creation, the meaning of the soul etc. For the soul, I have no comment on whether I believe it or not (personally, I have my own view point on my conciousness). As for universal creation, as I said, before the big bang its metaphysics and feel free to speculate as much as you like. Its unobservable and currently outside the realm of phsyics.. From the moment where physics applies to the universe I see the Kaballah (and the associated christian creation) as what it is - a creation myth and not a description of the universe. From: whatsherface ® 19/05/2001 21:29:43 Subject: re: Mathematical bible post id: 303456 I like Kabbalah as a map of consciousness, which it basically is. I suspect a lot's been tacked onto the pure mystic stuff that kabbalah grew from and obscured it, as with everything else. whf From: Ben ® 19/05/2001 21:32:40 Subject: re: Mathematical bible post id: 303458 i agree with geraint on the physics bit about hte universe now. but the universe is so complex and scientist know so little about it, that , i believe, there is plenty of room for a god. it doesn't mean that the scientist are wrong, or that religion is right. it just means that there is stuff we don't understand and applying agod to it, is just as good as applying physics. they both explain a lot. From: Chris W (Avatar) 19/05/2001 21:40:32 Subject: re: Mathematical bible post id: 303466 http://cs.anu.edu.au/~bdm/dilugim/torah.html Scientific Refutation of the Bible Codes covers such topics as: Assassinations Foretold in Moby Dick! From: Greg L. ® 19/05/2001 22:35:01 Subject: re: Mathematical bible post id: 303503 People have tried to use numerological arguments and 'prophecies' based on the bible before-it is little more than bad pseudoscience. Skeptical investigators, using similar techniques to those who alleged such a code existed, were able to extract 'predictions' at random from Moby Dick. I'm afraid the priests arguments are very bad science, and very poor theology, IMO. From: Greg L. ® 19/05/2001 22:48:14 Subject: re: Mathematical bible post id: 303521 well seeing how there is stacks of things that can not be explained satisfactorly by science, i could say some stuff. but that would be unfair, cos science just doesn't have the answers yet. I strongly disagree with this point. Although science may be unable to describe many systems in strictly deterministic terms due to their non-linearity or complexity (such as the human mind for instance) that does not mean we should leave the area uninvestigated by science. Ascribing a 'God of the Gaps' to either science or theology is very unsatisfactory. What if something directly attributed to a literal belief in 'God' (such as the immutability of species) is proved wrong later by a scientific theory, such as evolution did to the concept of instantly created and immutable species? Theology and religious belief run into deep trouble if they try to explain something away by 'arguing from ignorance,' as creationism often does. Whilst I have no trouble with your belief in God or Gods, the idea of God sitting back and acting as the 'prime mover' behind the forces of nature is not scientifically tenable. From: Geraint ® 20/05/2001 14:38:12 Subject: re: Mathematical bible post id: 303833 - Science works on hypotheses and predictions. All theorys are viable until observations rule them out. Thats how science works. So, when we see something, say an apple falling from a tree, we construct a hypothesis that it does so under the action of gravity. With this we predict that the apple always will fall down as our gravitational hypothesis says apples can only fall down. Someone else says but my hypothesis is something else, and 10% of the time apples will fall up. We watch many many apples - they all fall down. This disfavours hypothesis two, but strengths our belief in hypothesis one.. Perhaps we have two hypotheses - gravity and something else. We can look at the consequences of gravity on planets motions and make predictions. We can do the same for hypothesis two... If again both pass with flying colours, we can not favour one over the other. But if one makes predictions that are borne out, and one doesn;t, then again, we favour one over the other... So -to be scientific and introduce supernaturalism into science, we have to be able to make predictions with it - but in general, supernatural phenomena that people believe tend not to have predictive consequences - hence they would be in the realms of science.. This forum is un-moderated. The views and opinions expressed are those of the individual poster and not the ABC. The ABC reserves the right to remove offensive or inappropriate messages.