Fixing the Bible

[Rose]

Beginning with Genesis 1 and continuing through the entire Bible, those who read its content and believe it is the word of God are compelled to 'Fix it'…over, and over again the words must be "fixed" to fit reality. This strange behavior happens all because people are told these words are from God.

Whether it be explaining how God really created the heaven and earth despite what Genesis 1 says, or the reason the Bible gives two different accounts of the death of Judas…it is a continual effort to correct what is written – to fix – that which God has supposedly inspired.

Something to think about...:pop2:


Rose

[Richard Amiel McGough]

Beginning with Genesis 1 and continuing through the entire Bible, those who read its content and believe it is the word of God are compelled to 'Fix it'…over, and over again the words must be "fixed" to fit reality. This strange behavior happens all because people are told these words are from God.

Whether it be explaining how God really created the heaven and earth despite what Genesis 1 says, or the reason the Bible gives two different accounts of the death of Judas…it is a continual effort to correct what is written – to fix – that which God has supposedly inspired.

Something to think about...:pop2:


Rose
I agree. And it exposes a fundamental problem. How can the Bible be a "guide" to truth if we have to keep correcting it with out own knowledge?

Now that's something to think about!

[NumberX]

I think that's stupid.

I just read Rev. 22:18-19 and that's what I believe. Call me a simple believer I like that :)

[Richard Amiel McGough]

I think that's stupid.

I just read Rev. 22:18-19 and that's what I believe. Call me a simple believer I like that :)
No you don't. You don't really believe everything in the Bible because that is a logical impossibility. You have to add things and reinterpret things, and sometimes just plain ignore things that don't "fit" with the rest of the Bible.

I don't call your belief "simple" because it is not "simple" in any way at all! On the contrary, it requires an endless complexity of convoluted words to make your "simple belief" seem possible at all.

For example, do you keep ALL the laws of the OT? If not, then you are denying this verse?

Matthew 5:18 For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled. 19 Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.

[NumberX]

Oh you are right? It is not all about the physical plane no, that would be impossible. Do you think that I first have to understand everything and do everything on the physical plane what is written? Suppose someone is able to do that, then, at the end, the goal is? Considering whether the person wants to be with God or not? After the knowledge. Well, NOT.

The order is wanting to be with God in the first place by faith, and the rest like building up knowledge will be thrown towards the person. Love God with your heart, soul, and knowledge, is written, that's the order. Rose and you talk here about a different order, knowledge first and then soul (feelings) and then faith. The complete opposite. And then the goal is? It doesn't work this way because it is not written this way. When I read what Rose writes and what you write on the forum, you both already failed in the field of soul (feelings).

Gaining knowledge of The Word is like eating in the physical plane, you don't know how many food you are going to eat and what you are going to eat in your way of life before you die. Should you know beforehand, how would that make you feel?

I simply believe everything that is written because I understand that it does not concern the physical plane only and the understanding comes gradually.

[Richard Amiel McGough]

I simply believe everything that is written because I understand that it does not concern the physical plane only and the understanding comes gradually.
Maybe I don't know what you mean by "believe." I'm guessing you mean something like "I trust that it is true even though I might not understand it yet." Is that close?

That doesn't work for me because the word "believe" implies an understanding. A person cannot "believe" something that is not understood. It would be like saying "I believe gilfledorf with my whole heart." And then I ask "What is gifledorf?" and you say "I have no idea! But I believe it!" Such "belief" does not have much meaning, does it?

But then on the other hand, I understand that you could say that you believe that every word in "the" Bible is from God, and therefore true whether or not you understand it. I can see how you might believe that. But that's different than claiming that you actually "believe" the specific words that are actually written in the Bible. And there's another problem indicated by the word "the" that I put in quotes. There is no single Bible to believe! So which do you believe, and why? And even if you say the Protestant Bible, then you have to choose which version because different versions don't even have the same number of verses. E.g. 1 John 5:7 is eliminated in most modern versions. So do you believe it or not? It's a very sticky wicket it you really start to think about it.

[NumberX]

There is nothing difficult about. Believe that every word in the Bible comes from God, I mean, whether understood at a moment or not yet. And the Hebrew source of course, where one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law (from the teaching, in the sense of teaching that is good for you, like put on a shawl for not getting a cold). Bible translations are different.
Sorry but I feel that I am talking to a person who gets dumber and dumber.

So you are not able to do that, well I am.

You really want to know everything in the Bible first and breaking the order of loving God with your heart, soul and knowledge? All knowledge first? But what is your purpose with that?

[Richard Amiel McGough]

There is nothing difficult about. Believe that every word in the Bible comes from God, I mean, whether understood at a moment or not yet. And the Hebrew source of course, where one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law (from the teaching, in the sense of teaching that is good for you, like put on a shawl for not getting a cold). Bible translations are different.
Sorry but I feel that I am talking to a person who gets dumber and dumber.

So you are not able to do that, well I am.

You really want to know everything in the Bible first and breaking the order of loving God with your heart, soul and knowledge? All knowledge first? But what is your purpose with that?
Well, if I felt snarky I'd say the same thing about you. And I'd be right. Your assertion that "not one jot or tittle" would be lost from the Hebrew law is manifestly false because there are many ambiguous verses whre we don't know what the original said. There are differences in the existing manuscripts, so no one knows what the original text actually said. Therefore, many letters and even whole words, including their jots and tittles, have "passed from the law."

But that's really irrelevant because Jesus was talking figuratively, not literally, anyway.

Now as for you assertion about the "order of business" - you cannot love a God you do not know, and you would know nothing of the God of the Bible if you had no knowledge of the Bible. So obviously, you yourself have the order backwards. You began with knowledge, and then when you got a little knowledge, you changed you mind and now claim that you began with God. That is simply not true.

And it's also not true that I "really want to know everything in the Bible first" - I've never thought nor said anything like that. My reason for rejecting the Bible as the "inerrant and infallible Word of God" is two fold. First, it contains many contradictions, errors, and moral abominations. Second, the "personal God" of traditional Christian theism who intervenes and answers prayers does not exist. Everyone knows that God does not, as a general rule, answer prayers. This is why Christians always have to explain why God does not answer prayers. They might think God answers prayers because they have selective memory about when they lost their dog "Fluffy" and prayed for God to help find it, or when they had a headache and prayed for God to heal it, forgetting all the times when their child was deathly ill and they prayed and the child died anyway. We know this is an absurd world-view because it suggests that God is busy finding lost pets and helping high-school kids win football games while ignoring the cries of millions of starving children, 200,000 Christian victims of the earthquake in Haiti, all the victims of Japans tsunami and on and on. Bottom line: The world operates exactly as it would if there were no personal God answering prayers or intervening to protect us against earthquakes, illness, tsunamis or any other problems we struggle with every day.

[NumberX]

The scroll of the Hebrew Torah I know, has been unchanged for centuries, everywhere is a scroll present with the same amount of 'letters'. When someone wrote one letter wrong, he had to start again. It's the word Torah I translated above not as law, but as how I translated it. This corresponds with "not one jot or tittle". Pfft that I have to educate you this. Did you not know this? This is what I mean by that you get dumber and dumber all the time. And by the Bible Wheel and other sources we can understand that there is more on it's right place as it is today.

So the order of loving God by (1) faith, (2) feelings and (3) knowledge does not apply to you and Rose and must be a big mistakes line in the text in your eyes. You can use it as a stick towards Christians who like me can simply believe and enjoy and expand knowledge.

You are in the field of not having enough knowledge to have a truth, as your bottom line reads. Because of all kinds of mistakes you see. And your end goal is truth and nothing more it reads. Well we are all 'eating' everyday so that's no difference then any other person. You differ from a Christian by a lack of the above 1, 2 and part of 3. But don't feel uncomfortable, there are more like you who have a lack of the above 1, 2 and part of 3.

[duxrow]

Never mind the 'fixing' -- instead, keep on reading!

We wondered how Noah knew the difference between the clean and unclean animals, when Leviticus hadn't yet been written.

We wondered why God created it w/o form or void, until the "tohu va bohu" showed up in Isa45:18.

We wondered at all the doubles and twice-told, until we got to Gen41:32 and learned that "by two it's established”. A study of the "two's" may have been intended when Paul wrote about studying to show yourself approved.. hmmm?

[NumberX]

Some time ago I wondered what kind of person is this who can make a website so nice with Hebrew and the Bible Wheel, where I can read and that feels like having a warm bath! Now I understand this much better. When I split his personal opinion about the Bible and God and Christians to one side and his work to the other, I end up with one side I enjoy. Let's not mix these sides I think by myself, that's not necessary.

[NumberX]

Never mind the 'fixing' -- instead, keep on reading!

We wondered how Noah knew the difference between the clean and unclean animals, when Leviticus hadn't yet been written.

.. hmmm?

Heh! Haha! That's smart! They say the Torah is not subjected to time!

[Richard Amiel McGough]

The role of the Hebrew Torah I know, has been unchanged for centuries, everywhere is the same role present with the same amount of 'letters'. When someone wrote one letter wrong, he had to start again. It's the word Torah I translated above not as law, but as how I translated it. This corresponds with "not one jot or tittle". Pfft that I have to educate you this. Did you not know this? This is what I mean by that you get dumber and dumber all the time. And by the Bible Wheel and other sources we can understand that there is more on it's right place as it is today.

Your comments are becoming incomprehensible. You certainly do not need to educate me on this issue. You need to educate yourself. The myth that the Torah has been perfectly preserved is just that - a myth. It is not true, and if you believe it is then you are ignorant of the most basic element of Biblical studies. Here is a good place to start (http://www.aishdas.org/toratemet/en_text.html) your education. It is a brief overview from a very conservative Jew who would like to believe as you do but cannot because the facts contradict your belief.



There is no text more sacred to Jews than the Torah. While it is not the sole source of our religion, it is a holy work whose every word is precious. It is therefore a critical task, and a religious imperative, to determine whether the text of the Torah that we have is correct and, if not, to fix it. However, because of the importance of this mission, there is no room for hasty judgements or speculative decisions. This is a very serious undertaking that requires the proper sense of humility.


In this essay, we will list the various evidence we have for the Torah - what are called the "witnesses" of the text. Additionally, we will discuss the usefulness of each witness and, in this, depart from the standard academic method. Emanuel Tov wrote in what quickly became the standard handbook on textual criticism of the Bible, "[M]any scholars, including the present author, believe that all readings which have been created in the course of the textual transmission ought to be evaluated " (Emanuel Tov, Textual Criticism of the Hebrew Bible, p. 295). We disagree. Almost anyone who attends synagogue regularly has witnessed the finding of a mistake in a Torah scroll. An average Torah has some mistakes and therefore the precise reading of any given word is suspect. There are, however, better than average scrolls and even excellent scrolls that have been reviewed carefully many times. Only those witnesses that are known to be excellent scrolls are valid evidence. Average scrolls, such as the one in our synagogue, can hardly be used as proof of the original Torah text.



In addition to this, we will also depart from academics in the following. We will assume that, absent any evidence to the contrary, the text that is agreed upon by the Jewish community - the textus receptus that is claimed to be the Masoretic Text - is correct. In halacha, this is called chazaka. We will abide by the status quo until it is categorically disproven and only in those areas that it is disproven. Thus, if it is demonstrated that the textus receptus is inaccurate in its differentiation between א and ה - sometimes switching them - we will draw no conclusion regarding the differentiation between masculine and feminine nouns. Those are very different areas. Just because - and if - scribes made mistakes between א and ה does not mean that the entire text is worthless. It only means that any given א might be a ה and vice versa. However, if we detect evidence that the scribes who wrote this text were consistently careless in many areas or had no compunction regarding intentionally changing the text, then we have no choice but to disregard the entire text.


Pffft! I can't believe I have to school you on these elementary facts.



So the order of loving God by (1) faith, (2) feelings and (3) knowledge does not apply to you and Rose and must be a big mistakes line in the text in your eyes. You can use it as a stick towards Christians who like me can simply believe and enjoy and expand knowledge.

That is not the order you followed! I already explained this to you. It looks like you are not even reading what I wrote.




You are in the field of not having enough knowledge to have a truth, as your bottom line reads. Because of all kinds of mistakes you see. And your end goal is truth and nothing more it reads. Well we are all 'eating' everyday so that's no difference then any other person. You differ from a Christian by a lack of the above 1, 2 and part of 3. But don't feel uncomfortable, there are more like you who have a lack of the above 1, 2 and part of 3.
I have more than enough knowledge to conclude that the Bible is not the "inerrant and infallible Word of God." You are merely claiming to believe something when you don't even know what it is that you claim to believe. Sure, you can claim the Bible is perfect and all the errors are only apparent - who am I too stop you from living in a fantasy world? Don't feel uncomfortable, there are plenty more like you who have placed personal opinions and fantasy above truth and reality.

[Richard Amiel McGough]

Never mind the 'fixing' -- instead, keep on reading!

We wondered how Noah knew the difference between the clean and unclean animals, when Leviticus hadn't yet been written.

.. hmmm?
Heh! Haha! That's smart! They say the Torah is not subjected to time!
Or it is yet another anachronism that shows Genesis was not written by Moses, but rather is a composite text written and edited over a large span of time by multiple authors.

[Richard Amiel McGough]

The scroll of the Hebrew Torah I know, has been unchanged for centuries, everywhere is a scroll present with the same amount of 'letters'. When someone wrote one letter wrong, he had to start again. It's the word Torah I translated above not as law, but as how I translated it. This corresponds with "not one jot or tittle". Pfft that I have to educate you this. Did you not know this? This is what I mean by that you get dumber and dumber all the time. And by the Bible Wheel and other sources we can understand that there is more on it's right place as it is today.


Here is some more basic information (http://onthemainline.blogspot.com/2005/12/textual-criticism-of-torah-response-to.html) that anyone interested in the Torah should know about.



But getting a little back into history we have to conider the work of the Masoretes, baalei masorah, who standardized spelling and pronunciation. Consider, the Gemara says that we are not experts in plene and defective spelling (maaleh and haser). This even has halakhic implications. If a Torah is found with a mistake of this type then it is not rendered unkosher, since, the fact is that maybe the error is really 'correct.' Only other types of errors render a Torah unfit. Halakhic authorities like the Chasam Sofer invoked the 'we are not experts' rule in explaining why there is no blessing for the writing of a Torah, a mitzvah de-oraysa. If that's the case than why is that our Torahs essentially do, in theory, have exact conformity in the plene and defective spellings? After all, the Gemara implies that we wouldn't. The answer is that we wouldn't, and in Talmudic times they didn't, but for several centuries after the Talmudic period the Masoretes worked to standardize even the plene and defective spellings. So now we do--except that we don't really and we especially didn't until about 500 years ago.

Consider also that our oldest copies of Tanakh are about a thousand years old. Our Tanakhs are based on these and are known as the Masoretic Text. The ancient evidences do not confirm the Masoretic Text exclusively. For one thing, there are Dead Sea Scroll versions of parts of Tanakh that differ from our own. Then there is the Septuagint, a translation of the Tanakh made by Jews centuries before the Common Era. While working backwards from translations is a risky business (especially when we do not really known what methods the translators were using) there are places where we are certain as to what they were translating and the Septuagint implies a variant Hebrew text. Sometimes the variance is relatively minor, sometimes major. Not unoften this difference is reflected in the Dead Sea Scroll Hebrew versions, which means that the Septuagint was translated from the same text-type or a similar text as the Dead Sea versions. There was also Masoretic text-types among the Dead Sea Scrolls (but not identical to the Masoretic Text, henceforth 'MT'). This means that, minimally, there were different texts of the Torah in Second Temple times.

So there it is. The idea that the Masoretic text is the "true" or the "original" text is simply false. We don't have the original text.

[duxrow]

Kings couldn't usurp the Priest duties in the OT (Uzziah and Saul examples), but now in the NT we can be BOTH!

Ever wonder what kind of Light it was on Day One? (sun, moon, on Day Four) -- we FINALLY learn in John8:12, and how Jesus and The Father are One, John 10:30. TWO
Great Lights! PTL

[duxrow]

You have seen how the 66 books are complete, and fit a "pattern". Now, “understandest what thou readest?”

Melchizedek the King-Priest another example: After that brief intro in Gen14, nothing more for about a thousand years, until Ps110:4. Then, ANOTHER thousand years to the 'Rest of the Story' in Heb6-9.

Two Covenants and Three dispensations are highlighted here. Great feeding!

[Richard Amiel McGough]

You have seen how the 66 books are complete, and fit a "pattern". Now, 'understandest what thou readest?'

Yes, I understand much of it. But much remains to be understood. You and I are in the same boat, wouldn't you say?

The problem is not the Bible. The problem is our interpretation of the Bible, which is what your question suggests when you ask 'understandest what thou readest?' Everyone has their own interpretations, and that's fine. Most interpretations cannot be proven true or false. But the situation is quite different when folks insist that the Bible must be understood as the "inerrant and infallible Word of God" because that can be proven false in short order. And that's the irony - the folks who claim to have the highest regard for the Bible as the "very Word of God" actually have the greatest disregard for what the Bible really states! If God is the author of the Bible, then he has made it absolutely impossible for any rational person to assert that it is "inerrant and infallible."



Melchizedek the King-Priest another example: After that brief intro in Gen14, nothing more for about a thousand years, until Ps110:4. Then, ANOTHER thousand years to the 'Rest of the Story' in Heb6-9.

Two Covenants and Three dispensations are highlighted here. Great feeding!
Yes, there is indeed a lot of good food derived from Melchizedek.

[NumberX]

Here is some more basic information (http://onthemainline.blogspot.com/2005/12/textual-criticism-of-torah-response-to.html) that anyone interested in the Torah should know about.


So there it is. The idea that the Masoretic text is the "true" or the "original" text is simply false. We don't have the original text.

Well, have it your way in your brain. Should you or the persons in the links you give, be educated about the structures in the present text like I am by my professor's books - about the present Torahs with the 304,805 letters - then they may see it in another light. But, it is even possible that they still write like that, when they scale down their understanding deliberately afterwards. I don't like to discuss with persons who act like that, too dumb they get. So I rest my case here about this subject with you as well.

[NumberX]

Kings couldn't usurp the Priest duties in the OT (Uzziah and Saul examples), but now in the NT we can be BOTH!

Ever wonder what kind of Light it was on Day One? (sun, moon, on Day Four) -- we FINALLY learn in John8:12, and how Jesus and The Father are One, John 10:30. TWO
Great Lights! PTL

I like it, how you express! And there is no need for you to scale down your thoughts towards earthly.

[Richard Amiel McGough]

Well, have it your way in your brain. Should you or the persons in the links you give, be educated about the structures in the present text like I am by my professor's books - about the present Torahs with the 304,805 letters - then they may see it in another light. But, it is even possible that they still write like that, when they scale down their understanding deliberately afterwards. I don't like to discuss with persons who act like that, too dumb they get. So I rest my case here about this subject with you as well.
Well, there's no reason you could not assume that the 304,805 letter Torah is the final "inspired" version. Folks who adhere to the "King James Only" do the same thing. They think God freshly inspired the English version so that can even be used to correct the Greek and Hebrew!

And really, it's no different than the Bible Wheel. The Bible has gone through all sorts of changes over the centuries. It was only with the printing press that the order of the 66 books got solidly established. Indeed, this is one of the primary arguments folks use against the Bible Wheel. But the thing that refutes their argument is the power of the overall pattern. It is such that it proves there is something "supernatural" going on in the Bible. I've never seen anything like that in your studies of the Torah. Your studies are interesting and all, but they don't rise to anything like proof that there are not missing words or letters in the Torah.

[NumberX]

Well, there's no reason you could not assume that the 304,805 letter Torah is the final "inspired" version. Folks who adhere to the "King James Only" do the same thing. They think God freshly inspired the English version so that can even be used to correct the Greek and Hebrew!

And really, it's no different than the Bible Wheel. The Bible has gone through all sorts of changes over the centuries. It was only with the printing press that the order of the 66 books got solidly established. Indeed, this is one of the primary arguments folks use against the Bible Wheel. But the thing that refutes their argument is the power of the overall pattern. It is such that it proves there is something "supernatural" going on in the Bible. I've never seen anything like that in your studies of the Torah. Your studies are interesting and all, but they don't rise to anything like proof that there are not missing words or letters in the Torah.

I do not want to reply to what you hear all kinds of people have said everywhere, that can be anything. Now it is about the King James version and before about errors in the text and so on. It is too dumb for me to start responding to the out of the air grasping of what others have said who are not in this thread.

The posts I did are mainly about connections of the hebrew words and the physical world, I like to teach about this subject, because not much is known anymore about it. I do not critisize your work, you contributed to the Hebrew community, like I do, as far as we can speak of it.

Supernatural: "I have never seen anything like it in the Torah". Well I did. I am not the one who wrote this book (http://translate.google.nl/translate?js=n&prev=_t&hl=nl&ie=UTF-8&layout=2&eotf=1&sl=nl&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.hebreeuwseacademie.nl%2Findex.p hp%3Flocation%3Dbas%26pid%3D1.4&act=url) about it, but bought it, see the link (translated by Google) about the fact that throughout the hebrew letters the name YHVH 10-5-6-5 (word value is 26) is written in the line of generations from Adam to Moses, divided by ele toldoth. No. 26 is Moses, what a coincidence. And a crusial point in Torah-time joins a point in the Noah story and at the place where the two upside down Nun's are, is also a point of counted number of letters connected in a logic sense. There are places like this. And the 304,805 letters with reading signs are the exact number of persons in the story of the exile out of Egypt. A lot of these "coincidences" that are connected with each other are like the connected "coincidences" in the Bible Wheel study. Like the Jonah story is also divided at a crucal point, I wrote about it. And how the amount of hebrew letters of the Esther story relate to a Genesis story.

There is real proof that the today version is the inspired version for us people of today. We are not living in the past do we, with papyrus scrolls? So that version must have counted in another time. I am sure that The Lord understands that it is logic for us to have the today-version, He is also the One who goes along with the generations in the example given above.

[Richard Amiel McGough]

The posts I did are mainly about connections of the hebrew words and the physical world, I like to teach about this subject, because not much is known anymore about it. I do not critisize your work, you contributed also to the Hebrew community, like I do, as far as we can speak of it.

Supernatural: "I have never seen anything like it in the Torah". Well I did! But I am not the one who wrote the book (http://translate.google.nl/translate?js=n&prev=_t&hl=nl&ie=UTF-8&layout=2&eotf=1&sl=nl&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.hebreeuwseacademie.nl%2Findex.p hp%3Flocation%3Dbas%26pid%3D1.4&act=url) about it, but bought it. Throughout the hebrew letters the name 10-5-6-5 is written in generations, divided by ele toldoth. No. 26 is Moses. And a crusial point in Torah-time joins a point in the Noah story etc. A lot of these "coincidences" that are connected with each other are like the connected "coincidences" in the Bible Wheel study. Like the Jonah story is also divided at a crucal point, I wrote about it. And how the amount of hebrew letters of the Esther story relates to a Genesis story.
That's very interesting about Moses being #26, the value of YHVH. It coheres very well with his name being an anagram of HaShem (The Name) which is the most common reference to that name, as well as the fact that Moses had heard the name directly from God.

But I don't see how any of those patterns prove that there is not a missing letter here or there in the Torah. Could you elaborate on that point? Or did you overstate your case?

[NumberX]

I have added some more info to make it more interesting and more interesting and even more interesting haha. In your quest for truth you may find even more by reading the book from this author. I have given thie link so that you can continue your quest, that is, if your are honest about the bottom line in your posts.

Truth, emeth in Hebrew, reads 1 40 400. Buth without the 1 however it reads 40 400 and that means...

[Richard Amiel McGough]

I have added some more info to make it more interesting and more interesting and even more interesting haha. In your quest for truth you may find even more by reading the book from this author. I have given thie link so that you can continue your quest, that is, if your are honest about the bottom line in your posts.

Truth, emeth in Hebrew, reads 1 40 400. Buth without the 1 however it reads 40 400 and that means...
Oh yes ... I wrote an article years ago about the fascinating connection between Truth and Death in Hebrew, which we see also in common lingo like "The only things certain (true) are death and and taxes."

But I still have seen NOTHING that suggest you have any evidence for your assertion that there are no missing letters in the Torah. I've asked this question repeatedly. Why are you ignoring it?

[NumberX]

Yeah, why would someone make much work of finding Biblical truths and does not want to connect to God? We can ask ourselves. Sometimes we meet a mystery.

The Lord going along with the line of generations on the extraordinary way in the example above, putting His mark on the Torah this way, is good food for a potentional Christian, for the starting with faith, for also wanting to walk with The Lord, because we all are part of a generation. But this is something that you opposed to me in your earlier post, that I can not have faith in The Lord because that would not have any ground.. ?

Didn't I wote:
- And a crusial point in Torah-time joins a point in the Noah story
- and at the place where the two upside down Nun's are, is also a point of counted number of letters connected in a logic sense. There are places like this.
- And the 304,805 letters with reading signs are the exact number of persons in the story of the exile out of Egypt.

I need some time to find it again in this thick book of 600 pages with facts and will elaborate on this (I like the word elaborate). I like to do this for you, so that you can understand also that a papyrus version is not meant by The Lord for this time where we live in.

[EndtimesDeut32/70AD]

Matthew 5:17Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil. For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled. 19 Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.
This particular question was attempted to be discussed here. (http://www.biblewheel.com/forum/showthread.php?t=2014)

He has just introduced the Beatitudes and New individualized commandments of the inner person which are opposite of some of the law. But the law also contained the prophecies of the inferiority and latter end of the conditional corporal mosaic covenant and the prophecies of the fulfillment of the new covenant and the inner peace. He was teaching them the New Covenant as the NEW PROPHET and New Words of LIFE. This was contrast against the giving of the law in Deut 5 and Deut 18. If the law contained life, there would have been no need for a New Prophet bringing New Words.

Those in the inner circles would have understood of the coming end of the oppressive and religious law.

When he says these least [or lesser] commandments; he is not saying every jot and title of the mosaic covenant law; but these 'lesser' commandments of humility and servitude of the Beatitudes which he has JUST delivered as the New Prophet and which would supersede [though delivered in humility] the commandments of the inferior, temporary mosaic law.

There is a difference between saying 'every last commandment of the law and saying 'THESE LEAST Commandments which he has just discoursed. At the same time, he hadn't come to abrogate the mosaic covenant or the prophets, but to fulfill the prophecies including the latter ends prophesied in Deut:5;25,26, and Deut 32:20,29.

I guess that link probably has lots of discussion to clarify any quesitons.

[NumberX]

Don't distract him too much from the subject, the subject here is: Is there a fault in the text?

[EndtimesDeut32/70AD]

Don't distract him too much from the subject, the subject here is: Is there a fault in the text?
You can carry on with that subject. I just started into the thread and saw that this passage was being used as an example. I wanted to bring some light to it.

[NumberX]

Here I continue. First let’s look at what Jewish sages tell about the Torah narratives. They mention the planes of understanding:

1) Psat (literal meaning of the text). The narratives are the Torah’s window dressing.
2) Remez (allegorical illustration of Scripture). That goes on in a person when he makes effort to transcend the previous layer.
3) Drash (halachic and aggadic exegesis).
4) Sod (hidden or secret aspect of Torah).

Ok. Like Psalm 119:18:

According to the Biblical time in the Torah the next years:
The time where the first two ‘ele toldoth’ (birth histories) are based upon, are 1658 years and a few days. In 1658, two years after the flood, begins the third ele toldoth, the one of Shem. The third and fourth, till the end of the Torah, last 829 year and a few days. So in time we have here 1658 as 1, opposite of 829/1658 as being ½, 1 and a half, 1 ½, or 2:1.

This is a principal measure that we see in other stories as well. It is also the height of the arc in the tabernacle. And in the arc, inside the 1 ½, are the stone tables and the pentateuch, with thus has the 1 ½ in time structure. In the Noah story as well at one point, see this link (http://translate.google.nl/translate?js=n&prev=_t&hl=nl&ie=UTF-8&layout=2&eotf=1&sl=nl&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.hebreeuwseacademie.nl%2Findex.p hp%3Flocation%3Dbas%26pid%3D2.4&act=url) (translated by Google), beneath the fifth drawing about the flood.

It is the 10-5 in the eleh toldoth structure at that point of 1658, that wants to connect to the other 5 by a 6, to make the whole 10-5-6-5, as we have seen in Moses above. Moses meaning Son in Egyptian language, Moses being the saviour who leads Israel out of Egypt to Canaan. The 2:1 is also (the way) in the word values of Egypt and Canaan, exact ratio 2:1. It is as if the Bible shows us: That’s what it is about, the journey of the two towards the one with The Lord.

So the Torah shows without mistake what deep connection exists between the world of the appearances of the two (hot and cold, long and short etc.), the Word, the names, the system, it’s timeframe, our journey through life.. with The Lord, not without.

At the end of the Torah God says to Moses climb upon mount Nebo so you can see a lot in detail. Nebo, 50-2-6, counts 58. At this point there are exactly 5800 verses completed (Deut. 32:49) of the 5845, the 58 corresponds at this point “accidentally” with 5800. Should there be a verse missing, that could not be.

I have not seen any mistakes. And there are also cases with letters like this, I will look where I can find it in my books.

I feel that I have written enough now for today, and if I don’t fall into sorrow, I write more tomorrow.

[Richard Amiel McGough]

Yeah, why would someone make much work of finding Biblical truths and does not want to connect to God? We can ask ourselves. Sometimes we meet a mystery.

Who are you talking about? Who wouldn't want to connect to God?



The Lord going along with the line of generations on the extraordinary way in the example above, putting His mark on the Torah this way, is good food for a potentional Christian, for the starting with faith, for also wanting to walk with The Lord, because we all are part of a generation. But this is something that you opposed to me in your earlier post, that I can not have faith in The Lord because that would not have any ground.. ?

I don't know what you are talking about.

And what does "we are all part of a generation" mean? What does it have to do with anything? Are you suggesting that the "generations" listed in Genesis are descriptions of every generation throughout all time, and that we can somehow figure out which one we are part of? That doesn't sound very likely.



Didn't I wote:
- And a crusial point in Torah-time joins a point in the Noah story
- and at the place where the two upside down Nun's are, is also a point of counted number of letters connected in a logic sense. There are places like this.
- And the 304,805 letters with reading signs are the exact number of persons in the story of the exile out of Egypt.

- The first point does not prove anything about the exact number of letters of the entire Torah.

- I have not seen the information about the placement of the inverted Nuns. So I don't know what it might show.

- The assertion that there were exactly 304,805 persons in the story of the exile (did you mean exodus?) out of Egypt seems absurd to me. How would anybody know that? And what about the fact that the Bible says there were about 600,000 men, besides children? I get the feeling that the story would be "adjusted" to fit whatever the facts might be. If there were 363,453 letters, you'd say that was the "exact number" of people in the exile from Egypt. I do not understand how you could take such an idea seriously. Obviously, no one has real knowledge about such things, and there is no way to confirm such an speculation.



I need some time to find it again in this thick book of 600 pages with facts and will elaborate on this (I like the word elaborate). I like to do this for you, so that you can understand also that a papyrus version is not meant by The Lord for this time where we live in.
Thanks!

:signthankspin:

I very much appreciate your effort to elaborate. I like that word too. But what do you mean by "a papyrus version"? What are you talking about?

[Richard Amiel McGough]

Don't distract him too much from the subject, the subject here is: Is there a fault in the text?
Say what? :dizzy:

[Richard Amiel McGough]

Here I continue. First let’s look at what Jewish sages tell about the Torah narratives. They mention the planes of understanding:

1) Psat (literal meaning of the text). The narratives are the Torah’s window dressing.
2) Remez (allegorical illustration of Scripture). That goes on in a person when he makes effort to transcend the previous layer.
3) Drash (halachic and aggadic exegesis).
4) Sod (hidden or secret aspect of Torah).


Yes, I've been familiar with PRDS for many years. We are tracking here.



Ok. Like Psalm 119:18:

According to the Biblical time in the Torah the next years:
The time where the first two ‘ele toldoth’ (birth histories) are based upon, are 1658 years and a few days. In 1658, two years after the flood, begins the third ele toldoth, the one of Shem. The third and fourth, till the end of the Torah, last 829 year and a few days. So in time we have here 1658 as 1, opposite of 829/1658 as being ½, 1 and a half, 1 ½, or 2:1.

There are big problems here. First, where did you get the date of 1658? When the genealogies are added up, we get 1656!

Adam 130
Seth 105
Enos 90
Cainan 70
Maleleel 65
Jared 162
Enoch 65
Mathusela 187
Lamech 182
Noah 600
Sum To the Deluge = 1656

But there is another BIG problem with this date, because the years listed are only approximate because they are rounded to whole years. The months are not specified, so after a while the sum accumulates errors of many years. If we assume that the number of non-specified months is randomly distributed (so that they are sometimes nearly 0 and sometimes nearly 12), then on average each number listed would be off by 6 months. That's half a year of error in each number given. This means that after 10 generations the year count could be be off by anything between zero and ten years, and on average it will be five years short. Thus, the "year of the flood" could be anything between 1656 to 1666 years after the creation of Adam, and it is most likely around 1661, though nobody knows for sure.



At the end of the Torah God says to Moses climb upon mount Nebo so you can see a lot in detail. Nebo, 50-2-6, counts 58. At this point there are exactly 5800 verses completed (Deut. 32:49) of the 5845, the 58 corresponds at this point “accidentally” with 5800. Should there be a verse missing, that could not be.

And if the verse count changed, perhaps you'd find an even more astounding coincidence. You have no theory that predicted this particular correlation so there is no way to discern between chance and design. Such coincidences would be expected no matter if we added or removed verses, so it really doesn't prove anything at all. It's just one data point.



I have not seen any mistakes. And there are also cases with letters like this, I will look where I can find it in my books.

I feel that I have written enough now for today, and if I don’t fall into sorrow, I write more tomorrow.
I hope you do not fall into sorrow - and I really don't see anything that could cause that to happen. We are using our MINDS and INTELLIGENCE to understand if the patterns you see in the Bible are real. The only outcome I see are goodness, understanding, and truth.

All the very best.

[NumberX]

Yeah, the patterns I show with Biblical numbers are mathematically right, so they are per definition right. And the verses never changed, so that counts for sure, in a moment I give another example. Let's only look at what the Torah has to say mathematically.
About 1658. That’s written in Gen. 11:10 where the third new birth “ele toldoth” is mentioned, where Arpachshad is mentioned as being born two years after the flood. The generations of Shem come two years after the flood. So there is nothing wrong with it, the Torah-time here is divided in 2:1, according to it’s own measurement of time. We really don’t need to add our own thoughts of months to it that’s foolish. It is a creation on it’s own.

Now Psalm 119:18 again! Let’s elaborate on the place where the two inverted Nun’s are! They are in the original hebrew text.

When the four armies of the children of Israel in the desert start to move, something extraordinary happens, also in the Torah. In the Torah are 4000 verses passed and we are here at Num. 10:35 and 36. Those verses are between two upside down Nun’s. There are 85 letters between these Nun’s: 12 words in the first verse and 7 in the second verse. The upside down Nun’s are here not without meaning: here is marked that the Torah turns around, because the last verse of the Torah has 12 words and the first one 7.

When the four armies of the children of Israel in the desert start to move, the army of Yehudah starts first. Yehudah writes 10-5-6-5 with a 4 in it. So here the 4 and 4000 meet, what a “coincidence”. Should there be a verse missing, that could not be.

So, the message of the Torah is that we have a journey that goes from 2 to 1, together with The Lord. The Torah has the blueprint of Lord on it, of 10-5-6-5 on it, in the generations. Thanks to the works of ‘my professor’, who was able to filter this out of the Torah. He on his turn publishes knowledge form ancient sources. I can not think of anyone else who is able to filter this out of the Torah.

[Richard Amiel McGough]

Yeah, the patterns I show with Biblical numbers are mathematically right, so they are per definition right. And the verses never changed, so that counts for sure, in a moment I give another example. Let's only look at what the Torah has to say mathematically.
About 1658. That’s written in Gen. 11:10 where the third new birth “ele toldoth” is mentioned, where Arpachshad is mentioned as being born two years after the flood. The generations of Shem come two years after the flood. So there is nothing wrong with it, the Torah-time here is divided in 2:1, according to it’s own measurement of time. We really don’t need to add our own thoughts of months to it that’s foolish. It is a creation on it’s own.

OK - I understand why you used the number 1658. But what about the fact that the numbers of months are not mentioned? Do you not understand why that invalidates the calculations? For example, let's suppose that Adam begot Seth when he was 130 years and 4 months old, and Seth begat Enos when he was 105 years and eight months old. Then when you add those two numbers you get exactly 236 years, not the 235 that you would get by just adding 130 + 105. Do you not understand why this destroys the patterns you are talking about? Or do you assume that each person listed in the genealogies was actually born on his father's birthday? That seems pretty unlikely ...


In the Torah are 4000 verses passed and we are here at Num. 10:35 and 36. Those verses are between two upside down Nun’s. There are 85 letters between these Nun’s: 12 words in the first verse and 7 in the second verse. The upside down Nun’s are here not without meaning: here is marked that the Torah turns around, because the last verse of the Torah has 12 words and the first one 7.


Where are you getting your information about verse counts? In my database, verse number 4000 is Numbers 10:11, not 10:34. That's a difference of 23 verses. I checked my database and found nothing that could account for this large discrepancy. I'm using the Masoretic text. What manuscript are you using?

You also said that Deut. 32:49 is verse number 5800, but in my database verse number 5800 is Deut 32:41, which is off by eight verses. Again, I can't find anything that would account for a 23 verse difference at verse number 4000 and an 8 verse difference at verse number 5800. So please, tell me where are you getting these verse counts? Do you have your own database? Are you counting by hand? Or are you just relying on the authority of your "professor?"

And how do you explain the difference between the tradition that says the Torah has 600,000 letters (corresponding to the men in the Exodus) and the fact that it really has only half that number?

[kathryn]

When the four armies of the children of Israel in the desert start to move, something extraordinary happens, also in the Torah. In the Torah are 4000 verses passed and we are here at Num. 10:35 and 36. Those verses are between two upside down Nun’s. There are 85 letters between these Nun’s: 12 words in the first verse and 7 in the second verse. The upside down Nun’s are here not without meaning: here is marked that the Torah turns around, because the last verse of the Torah has 12 words and the first one 7.

We've seen with the Bible Wheel, the divine order of God that appears like a solid frame on which man has hung his carnal interpretations. It is rather like that illustration of the tree, with all of the "fouls of the air" perched in its branches. It just needed a good shaking to get all of the corruption (leaven) out of it. (what can be shaken WILL be shaken)
When I read this comment by Numberx above, I wondered if the "bones" of the language itself, could reveal the same thing. I have seen evidence in not only the gematria, but the actual numbers themselves, that this is happening, although I'm no where near being able to prove it. Wouldn't it be ironic if, underneath man's voice, God is standing doing "signs", like the people on the telly for deaf people. Can't you just see Paul, adamantly preaching that women must remain silent in church, and God behind signing:" Paul, unfortunately, is full of wind. " har!

PS..maybe the two upside=down Nuns are another example of the caterpillar hanging upside down on the stem, as it is moving into the process of transformation into a butterfly!

[kathryn]

And...(snort)...the fact they are NUNS strikes my funny bone too!

[Richard Amiel McGough]

We've seen with the Bible Wheel, the divine order of God that appears like a solid frame on which man has hung his carnal interpretations. It is rather like that illustration of the tree, with all of the "fouls of the air" perched in its branches. It just needed a good shaking to get all of the corruption (leaven) out of it. (what can be shaken WILL be shaken)
When I read this comment by Numberx above, I wondered if the "bones" of the language itself, could reveal the same thing. I have seen evidence in not only the gematria, but the actual numbers themselves, that this is happening, although I'm no where near being able to prove it. Wouldn't it be ironic if, underneath man's voice, God is standing doing "signs", like the people on the telly for deaf people. Can't you just see Paul, adamantly preaching that women must remain silent in church, and God behind signing:" Paul, unfortunately, is full of wind. " har!

PS..maybe the two upside=down Nuns are another example of the caterpillar hanging upside down on the stem, as it is moving into the process of transformation into a butterfly!
Very well stated! Good in both humor and insight. I particularly find the words highlighted blue very helpful. Thanks.

:signthankspin:

[NumberX]

OK - I understand why you used the number 1658. But what about the fact that the numbers of months are not mentioned?

You also said that Deut. 32:49 is verse number 5800, but in my database verse number 5800 is Deut 32:41, which is off by eight verses.

And how do you explain the difference between the tradition that says the Torah has 600,000 letters

1) Why adding months when the Torah is not mentioning them? That is an addidion that does not count. Let's not follow your mind but only what is written.

2) The Torah contains 5,845 verses. I substract the 12 verses of the last chapter, the 29 of the next and 4 verses of the next: that’s 45 isn’t it? So here we are at Deut. 32:49 just like I wrote, voila: “Get thee up into this mountain Abarim, unto mount Nebo (50-2-6, let me spell that for you haha, word value 58), which is in the land of Moab, ..”
So there is nothing wrong with it. For the other verse count and letter count I have no reason to rely on you.

And about your work: I hold on to it that I will not critisize it.

[Richard Amiel McGough]

1) Why adding months when the Torah is not mentioning them? That is an addidion that does not count. Let's not follow your mind but only what is written.

2) The Torah contains 5,845 verses. I substract the 12 verses of the last chapter, the 29 of the next and 4 verses of the next: that’s 45 isn’t it? So here we are at Deut. 32:49 just like I wrote, voila: “Get thee up into this mountain Abarim, unto mount Nebo (50-2-6, let me spell that for you haha, word value 58), which is in the land of Moab, ..”
So there is nothing wrong with it. For the other verse count and letter count I have no reason to rely on you.

And about your work: I hold on to it that I will not critisize it.
1) I was not suggesting that we should add to the Torah. I was explaining why we should not think that the Torah gives us enough information to calculate the dates that lie at the foundation of your claims. Sure, you can add those numbers to get 1658, but you know that 1658 is not the actual number of years unless you assume that all the sons were born on their father's birthdays. But that's not in the Torah, so let's follow your advice and follow "only what is written."

I hope you can see that the Sword of Truth cuts both ways.

2) How do you know that there are 5845 verse in the Torah? Have you counted them? Do you know what version you are using? I asked this before but you did not answer. Did you know that there is another version that has 5853 verses? Here is the basic reason, as explained in this scholarly book called Studies in Hebrew and Aramaic Orthography (http://books.google.com/books?id=l9HBsxqOJL4C&pg=PA303&lpg=PA303&dq=torah+5845+5853+verses&source=bl&ots=Q2oCYyBT6J&sig=Cf0QnKAgBfEujNN6Myw8zVEfD1s&hl=en&ei=ZgTwTYy9EJG0sAPn0omgDg&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=5&ved=0CDAQ6AEwBA#v=onepage&q&f=false):

http://www.biblewheel.com/images/Torah_verse_counts_Freedman.jpg

My database follows the Leningrad Codex (L) masora which has 5853 verse rather than the one with 5845. This is exactly 8 more than the number you give, and that accounts precisely for the difference in our two tallies. But which is right? Do you know? If not, why do you follow the one and not the other?

Unfortunately, there is no way to account for the difference in your claim concerning the verse number 4000. In both the BHS and L, the verse number 4000 is Deut 10:11, not 10:34 as you have it, which means that you are off by 23 verses, which simply cannot be correct in any version that I know of. So again, let me ask how did you arrive at that verse? I am assuming that you simply accepted it on faith. But I hope now you can see why that is such a big mistake when dealing with things like the versification of the Bible. There are many issues that come up because of different manuscripts and the different ways of counting things as explained in that brief page I posted above.

Finally, I am very very sad that you do not criticize my work. I've tried to get folks to critically review it for decades, but they rarely do. They usually either accept it or reject it without any critical thought at all, which makes me very sad. Criticism is essential to finding truth in any field of study. That's why religious people are so gullible and stupid. They believe whatever they are told, or whatever they want to believe without any critical thought. This is encouraged by religion because religion teaches that BLIND FAITH is the highest virtue, and questions and doubts are sinful and from the devil. Thus religion breeds docile blind sheep so the wolves posing as shepherds can have a steady diet of mutton. It is very very sad.

[Richard Amiel McGough]

Here's some more info from Freedman's book called Studies in Hebrew and Aramaic Orthography (http://books.google.com/books?id=l9HBsxqOJL4C&pg=PA303&lpg=PA303&dq=torah+5845+5853+verses&source=bl&ots=Q2oCYyBT6J&sig=Cf0QnKAgBfEujNN6Myw8zVEfD1s&hl=en&ei=ZgTwTYy9EJG0sAPn0omgDg&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=5&ved=0CDAQ6AEwBA#v=onepage&q&f=false):

http://biblewheel.com/images/verse_counts_freedman.jpg

The column labels (C, P, A, L, etc.) indicate the different manuscripts that were analyzed. As you can see, there are many variations in the various versions. Does this mean anything to you? Do you know which version you use? Is there a reason you think that your version is the one and only "inspired version" and all the others are erroneous?

And here's some more info about the BHS (http://people.brandeis.edu/%7Ebrettler/biblehelp/scholarly.html) which is the based on the Leningrad Codex B19a, which is the text in my database:



Not all printed Bibles are identical; there are several differences in vocalization and more rarely in the consonantal text between various biblical editions. The standard critical biblical text is called Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia (abbreviated BHS), and was published as a complete work in 1977. It uses as its basis a biblical manuscript from the year 1008 or 1009 CE, called Leningrad B19 A. This is the earliest extant, complete, vocalized biblical manuscript. An earlier manuscript, called the Aleppo Codex, is more accurate than - :eek: - Leningrad B19A, but unfortunately, it is no longer complete, having been partially burned during a pogrom in Syria in 1947.
Hummmm ... some manuscripts are "more accurate" than others, and none are perfect. Might want to think about that for a while.

[NumberX]

So if I understand it well you put your trust in a manuscript, but you don't know if it's the right one, you just believe in it.

By not critisizing your work I mean that the discovered patterns are mathematically right so they are per definition right. Let’s enjoy it.

About verse 4000 I must have misunderstood the explanation of my prof. if it is Num. 10:11 and not Num 10:35, that he wrote about, they are connected by telling the same thing, with in between the account of the order of the armies.
Num. 10:11 “…that the cloud was taken up from off the tabernacle of the testimony” what causes to start their journeys as we see, just as verse 35 and 36 say:
35 And it came to pass, when the ark set forward, that Moses said, Rise up, LORD, and let thine enemies be scattered; and let them that hate thee flee before thee. 36 And when it rested, he said, Return, O LORD, unto the many thousands of Israel.
Now we can understand this better. It would be nice if you show a screenshot from your program of this, from the masora with the 5845 verses, because:

The manuscript my professor must have been using is the one that nowadays is common - and that's logic also from God's point of view; not giving confusion with many manuscripts of the Torah - the masora with the 5845 verses. I never thougth about it before but this one must be it, because of verse 5800. Sources that can be of any help where he must have found the info about the showed structures, are mainly Talmoed Babli, Midrash Rabba, Midrash Tanchoema, Pirke de-Rabbi Eliëzer, Sefer ha-Jashar.

About the generatiosn of birthdays, on the same birthday of their fathers, two things crossed my mind. What if a difference is already counted into it? And second, the Torah can be understood in planes of understanding according to the sages and as we agreed:
1) Psat (literal meaning of the text). The narratives are the Torah’s window dressing.
2) Remez (allegorical illustration of Scripture). That goes on in a person when he makes effort to transcend the previous layer.
3) Drash (halachic and aggadic exegesis).
4) Sod (hidden or secret aspect of Torah).
If it does not fit to the world you see around you, like the extremely long lives, then it must have a meaning on another plane of understanding. God created the physical and spiritual. In our lives we gradually get more understanding, just like we eat, "our daily bread". And some things we don't want to eat, that's normal too. And some things we eat without analysing it first, that's normal too. Your view is, analyse everything first before you eat it. That's also normal but can lead also to: Go eat a piece of a corpse of a dead animal and cover it with corpse-juice. hmmm, yummi! There are things that have to be said in another way you see, on another plane of understanding.

Back to the manuscrips: It may be a good reason - because of the mathematical structures I showed above - to use the masora of today with the 5845 verses. Who knows you find even more exciting patterns. What you can do is read about even more structures in the links I provided and convince yourself and say heh, that's the right one to continue with, that one looks mathematically correct to me. I for sure would put my trust in that one.

Now I am going to watch "Super Structures" on Discovery Channel.

[Richard Amiel McGough]

So if I understand it well you put your trust in a manuscript, but you don't know if it's the right one, you just believe in it.

No ... I never said anyone should "put their trust" in a manuscript. The whole of idea of "trusting" religious authorities, whether human beings or manuscripts, is WRONG. Don't trust mortal or material authorities! They can be corrupted. Why trust something that is corruptible?



By not critisizing your work I mean that the discovered patterns are mathematically right so they are per definition right. Let’s enjoy it.

How would you know they are right if you didn't critically analyze them? For me, the joy comes from analyzing the patterns and making genuine discoveries. There would be nothing to enjoy if they are not analyzed. That's why I ask tough questions about the facts you present. They wouldn't be any fun if they were false, would they?

Some people think the word "criticize" has negative connotations, as if it meant "insult" or "reject without reason." That's not how it is used in intellectual discussions. Have you ever heard of the famous book by Immanuel Kant called "Critique of Pure Reason?" It was a philosophical analysis of reason, he wasn't just "picking on" reason as if it was a bad thing that should be rejected.



About verse 4000 I must have misunderstood the explanation of my prof. if it is Num. 10:11 and not Num 10:35, that he wrote about, they are connected by telling the same thing, with in between the account of the order of the armies.
Num. 10:11 '…that the cloud was taken up from off the tabernacle of the testimony' what causes to start their journeys as we see, just as verse 35 and 36 say:
35 And it came to pass, when the ark set forward, that Moses said, Rise up, LORD, and let thine enemies be scattered; and let them that hate thee flee before thee. 36 And when it rested, he said, Return, O LORD, unto the many thousands of Israel.

Now we can understand this better. It would be nice if you show a screenshot from your program of this, from the masora with the 5845 verses, because:

The manuscript my professor must have been using is the one that nowadays is common - and that's logic also from God's point of view; not giving confusion with many manuscripts of the Torah - the masora with the 5845 verses. I never thougth about it before but this one must be it, because of verse 5800. Sources that can be of any help where he must have found the info about the showed structures, are mainly Talmoed Babli, Midrash Rabba, Midrash Tanchoema, Pirke de-Rabbi Eliëzer, Sefer ha-Jashar.

I understand what you are saying, but I think there is a big problem that you are not seeing. You would find interesting patterns in any of the manuscripts, no matter how they differed in numbers of verses and letters. The kinds of patterns you are finding can be found anywhere. Do you understand the logical fallacy called Cherry Picking (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cherry_picking_%28fallacy%29)? You present only evidence that supports your case. Can you even conceive of any evidence that would contradict your belief? If not, then all the "evidence" you are presenting is not evidence for design at all - it's merely a set of intriguing coincidences that could be found in any text. That is my fundamental criticism of this whole method of studying Scripture.



About the generatiosn of birthdays, on the same birthday of their fathers, two things crossed my mind. What if a difference is already counted into it?

It is impossible for the "difference to already be counted in." The months must be specified or it is simply impossible to add the years to arrive at valid dates. Simple as that.



If it does not fit to the world you see around you, like the extremely long lives, then it must have a meaning on another plane of understanding.

Or it could be wrong.



God created the physical and spiritual. In our lives we gradually get more understanding, just like we eat, "our daily bread". And some things we don't want to eat, that's normal too. And some things we eat without analysing it first, that's normal too. Your view is, analyse everything first before you eat it. That's also normal but can lead also to: Go eat a piece of a corpse of a dead animal and cover it with corpse-juice. hmmm, yummi! There are things that have to be said in another way you see, on another plane of understanding.

Your autopsy analogy is fallacious because you are basing your own "eating" upon the gory details or your numerical autopsy of the text. If you want to just "eat" the text without analyzing it, then quit analyzing it already! :p

But if you want to analyze it, then you must use your critical thinking to the best of your ability.



Back to the manuscrips: It may be a good reason - because of the mathematical structures I showed above - to use the masora of today with the 5845 verses. Who knows you find even more exciting patterns. What you can do is read about even more structures in the links I provided and convince yourself and say heh, that's the right one to continue with, that one looks mathematically correct to me. I for sure would put my trust in that one.

Now I am going to watch "Super Structures" on Discovery Channel.
Actually, you have not shown me any convincing "mathematical structures" as yet. Most of what you have shown me appears to be a combination of cherry picking and just so stories. I'm pretty sure that your professor would have presented similar material if he were a Muslim studying the Quran. You can do it with any text. The kinds of facts you are presenting simply do not support the conclusions you claim.

I hope you don't get frustrated with my insistence upon careful analysis and critical thought. It's the only way to truth on matters like this.

Great chatting!

[NumberX]

About the manuscript you use, I like to ask you: WHY do you use the one you use? When I Google “Torah 5845 verses” I get 471 results and “Torah 5853 verses” only 5 results, that means that you use a far less popular one.

To put it in a larger perspective: There are two scrolls, the Torah and the Esther scroll. The Torah has 5845 verses and Esther has 167 verses, 5845 is exactly 35 times 167. We know that 35, 3,5 and 350 are numbers who have a meaning in many stories. The account of the seventh day, Gen. 2:1-3, the day that counts as today’s world because it is not written “it was night and it was morning, the seventh day”, is written in 35 hebrew words, for example. Plus, this is verse 32, 33 and 34, with verse 35 begins a new birth, the first “ele toldoth”.

So I give you two good reasons why I think 5845 is the one, that’s also 5800+45. I am curious about your motivation to use another manuscript, was that maybe wat you call “cherry picking”?

[Richard Amiel McGough]

About the manuscript you use, I like to ask you: WHY do you use the one you use? When I Google “Torah 5845 verses” I get 471 results and “Torah 5853 verses” only 5 results, that means that you use a far less popular one.

To put it in a larger perspective: There are two scrolls, the Torah and the Esther scroll. The Torah has 5845 verses and Esther has 167 verses, 5845 is exactly 35 times 167. We know that 35, 3,5 and 350 are numbers who have a meaning in many stories. The account of the seventh day, Gen. 2:1-3, the day that counts as today’s world because it is not written “it was night and it was morning, the seventh day”, is written in 35 hebrew words, for example. Plus, this is verse 32, 33 and 34, with verse 35 begins a new birth, the first “ele toldoth”.

So I give you two good reasons why I think 5845 is the one, that’s also 5800+45. I am curious about your motivation to use another manuscript, was that maybe wat you call “cherry picking”?
Yes, that is exactly what I call "cherry picking." Those two tiny cherries prove absolutely nothing. You could find a hundred like them in any version of the Torah with any of the variant versifications. If Esther had one extra verse so this particular example didn't work, it wouldn't prove that you had the wrong text because there is no reason to think there should be a connection between the verses of Esther and the Torah. Therefore, the fact it does work doesn't prove you have the correct text.

I use the Torah with 5853 verses because that is how the BHS (the best text available) was versified. It only differs by the way 8 verses are counted, and the issue has never come up so I never dug into it. I don't have immediate access to the Masoretic text with the 5845 verses, so I can't compare to see where the 8 different verses are or if the differences are significant. The "counting of verses" has never been a major interest of mine, especially because there are differences between versions.

You still have not told me which version you use. I am beginning to suspect you don't know. Is the Hebrew text you use on computer or in a book? What is it called? Surely you must know. Or do not even own a Hebrew version? Are all your results just taken from your professor's book?

As for your google count - that doesn't prove that either is correct. Truth is not determined by popularity. I get the impression you did not read or understand the scholastic explanations I posted.

You are committed to a particular document because that's what you have been taught. But the evidence you offer does not appear to rise above the level of cherry picked coincidences. If you were committed to a different text, you would find a different set of coincidences to make your case. Merely listing a set of coincidences can never prove which is the "correct version" because you have not analyzed the "other text" to prove that it doesn't have even more convincing coincidences. Do you understand this point?

[Richard Amiel McGough]

Hey there NumberX,

Could you please tell me how many verses there are in the Tanakh that you use? It's important.

Thanks! :yo:

Richard

[NumberX]

I use the Torah with 5853 verses because that is how the BHS (the best text available) was versified.



Can you elaborate on this please? I do not understand "the best text available" like who gave the BHS this title I am wondering.

I thought that it was already clear that the Torah with the 5845 verses and the mathematical connections is part of the Masoric text, it "is the authoritative Hebrew text of the Jewish Bible regarded almost universally as the official version of the Tanakh" and I have added Midrash info where the mathematical constructions in the Torah can be found.

I am curious where the addition of eight verses in the version you use is located, it's before the 5800, so this connection can not be made in what your source names "the best text available". There is more to this important point then I have written about, but this alone is enough as verification point to other vesions for me.

My advice is change to the Masoric Torah with the 5845 verses, start working on getting one, do not miss future verse connections in the Bible Wheel, especially now you don't even know where the added eight verses are in the version you use! Isn't connecting verses a big part of the Bible Wheel? So give it a thought, I think it's really important and an improvement.

My advice here is meant as positive critisism, that should make you feel happy. But also make you start working, because if you want to stick to a Torah with 5853 verses, I personally see a Bible Wheel on a wrong foundation.

[NumberX]

I can elaborate on the 35. The ratio of the Torah is 1:4, that’s 1 Genesis to the other 4 books, the division is made in Exodus 1:8. To this ratio of 1:4 is Esther related with number 35 in verses, as explained before. The first new birth ‘ele toldoth’ begins with verse no. 35 of Genesis and that’s in the formation story where the ‘ed, the mist, the 1-4 starts and the next is Adam 1-4-40, where it is in. And we all walk around on the globe in a 1:4 ratio, divided by our hinges.

This means that the Torah (scroll) HAS to have 5845 verses - easy to remember by 5800+45, the 45 of Adam 1-4-40, or ‘mah’, what?, also 45) - and Esther (scroll, folded into 4 parts) HAS to have 167 verses. This mathematical relation is now extended by the 35
- verses relating to the 1:4 of the whole Torah
- letters relating to the 1:4 base in the Gen. 2 formation, and the 1:4 is in mankind as we all walk around here on the physical plane as 1:4 as well.

It also proves in detail that Esther has to be a part of the Bible. In the Bible Wheel is Esther on spoke 17 (http://www.biblewheel.com/wheel/spokes/Pey_Mouth.asp).

[NumberX]

Hey there NumberX,

Could you please tell me how many verses there are in the Tanakh that you use? It's important.

Thanks! :yo:

Richard

That's not a part of my study. But when I come across other info about a number that counts between books found by someone - and math provides solid proof - l let you know.

[NumberX]

And the book Jonah has a correct set of words and verses, as I explained here (http://www.biblewheel.com/forum/showthread.php?t=1854)

[NumberX]

Conclusion:

As we can see, looking at the subject of this thread, I brought up issues in the line of Psalm 119:18, solved a big problem of Richard concerning the line of generations and chose a right Torah version with the help of another scroll and a 1:4 projection. I see no errors and hope you reader learned a lot.

There is a time to come and a time to go and I feel the time to go has come. So this will be my last post. Bye bye dear reader, and don’t forget, Praise the Lord, Hallelujah!