Thread #888...

[RC Christian]

YES!!!!!! I'm thread #888 in the Christianity section...the gematria of JESUS!

Sorry, I couldn't resist the opportunity.

[Richard Amiel McGough]

YES!!!!!! I'm thread #888 in the Christianity section...the gematria of JESUS!

Sorry, I couldn't resist the opportunity.
That's alright my friend! It's good to have a little fun once in a while. We shouldn't take ourselves too seriously.

So now that you own Thread #888, whatchya gonna do with it, eh? It better be impressive now that you stepped in it! :police:

[RC Christian]

That's alright my friend! It's good to have a little fun once in a while. We shouldn't take ourselves too seriously.

So now that you own Thread #888, whatchya gonna do with it, eh? It better be impressive now that you stepped in it! :police:


Alright...you caught me! Hummm...ummm. Can I do a little gematria here? Thanks!

JESUS (888) + CHRIST (1480) = 2368...the Hebrew year of Moses birth (starting at Adam...Hebrew year 1) BAM!

...mere coincidence...never! Design of some smart men working with numbers...of course!

[Richard Amiel McGough]

Alright...you caught me! Hummm...ummm. Can I do a little gematria here? Thanks!

JESUS (888) + CHRIST (1480) = 2368...the Hebrew year of Moses birth (starting at Adam...Hebrew year 1) BAM!

...mere coincidence...never! Design of some smart men working with numbers...of course!
Nicely played!

But now, en garde!

:fencing:

I do believe you appeal too frequently to the idea of "smart men working with numbers." The date that Moses was born is determined by genealogies in the Bible that existed long before anyone thought to make them fit with the gematria of Jesus Christ.

Are you saying that all "coincidences" were designed? So the English Gematria coincidence that Jesus = 74 = Lucifer = Muhammed is supposed to have been designed by some "smart guys?"

What are the rules of your game? How do you discern between chance and design?

[RC Christian]

Nicely played!

But now, en garde!

:fencing:

I do believe you appeal too frequently to the idea of "smart men working with numbers." The date that Moses was born is determined by genealogies in the Bible that existed long before anyone thought to make them fit with the gematria of Jesus Christ.

Are you saying that all "coincidences" were designed? So the English Gematria coincidence that Jesus = 74 = Lucifer = Muhammed is supposed to have been designed by some "smart guys?"

What are the rules of your game? How do you discern between chance and design?


How about the title/name "Jesus Christ" being constructed to embody the number 2368, which was already established in association with the Hebrew character Moses?

I've never taken the time to study English gematria, so I will have to pass on that one, but is it possible? Sure. Is it true? Beats me.

In regards to the rules of my game, I go off of good old gut instinct on something that appears to be more than not intentionally designed, think about it for a while, and then appeal to someone like yourself with a better mathematics background than myself, to see if they can help me construct a probability equation for testing my hypothesis.

[Richard Amiel McGough]

How about the title/name "Jesus Christ" being constructed to embody the number 2368, which was already established in association with the Hebrew character Moses?

Nice try, but there are a number of problems with that suggestion. The Greek name Iησους (Jesus = 888) is the translation of the Hebrew יהושע (Yehoshua, Joshua). The Hellenistic Jews had been using that Greek name for centuries before Jesus was born. And likewise, the title Xριστος (Christ = 1480) had been used for the Hebrew משיח (Messiah) for many centuries. So the numerical value of the title Jesus Christ = 2368 was established by history long before he came on the scene. The idea that there were people consciously designing the these these facts too fit some obscure number like the birth date of Moses is utterly unbelievable to me.

And what's so important about the birth date of Moses calculated by some Jews? I've never even heard of it before and I can't imagine why anyone would think it had much importance. What makes you think they are even correct? Does anyone else think they were correct? When was the first time anyone concluded it was in the year 2368 after Adam? And if they were going to fit numbers to the title of the Lord Jesus Christ = 3168 why didn't they use that value? Or why not 888? Or why not 754, which is his title in Hebrew? Wouldn't that be what we'd expect if some "smart men" were doing this stuff? And that brings forth my real problem with your "method." You don't have any "method!" :winking0071: You have no way to know what to "expect" so you just go looking for "hits" and ignore the rest that doesn't fit.

It seems to me that you are just picking random coincidences and giving them a HUGE significance if they happen to fit your preconceived ideas and completely ignoring them if they don't fit. That's called "cherry picking" and it is the bane of all pattern hunters.



I've never taken the time to study English gematria, so I will have to pass on that one, but is it possible? Sure. Is it true? Beats me.

I'm convinced that English Gematria has no significance. But it is is a favorite amongst English speaking number folks since they don't have to learn those old languages,and they can find patterns everywhere all around them. Unfortunately, they are just coincidences. But some folks take them very seriously. Here's a rather thorough post (http://www.biblewheel.com/forum/showthread.php?686-English-Gematria&p=8923#post8923) where I state my reasons for rejecting it.



In regards to the rules of my game, I go off of good old gut instinct on something that appears to be more than not intentionally designed, think about it for a while, and then appeal to someone like yourself with a better mathematics background than myself, to see if they can help me construct a probability equation for testing my hypothesis.
Great! I hope I can help. I very much enjoy finding ways to discern between chance and design in these matters.

[RC Christian]

Nice try, but there are a number of problems with that suggestion. The Greek name Iησους (Jesus = 888) is the translation of the Hebrew יהושע (Yehoshua, Joshua). The Hellenistic Jews had been using that Greek name for centuries before Jesus was born. And likewise, the title Xριστος (Christ = 1480) had been used for the Hebrew משיח (Messiah) for many centuries. So the numerical value of the title Jesus Christ = 2368 was established by history long before he came on the scene. The idea that there were people consciously designing the these these facts too fit some obscure number like the birth date of Moses is utterly unbelievable to me.

And what's so important about the birth date of Moses calculated by some Jews? I've never even heard of it before and I can't imagine why anyone would think it had much importance. What makes you think they are even correct? Does anyone else think they were correct? When was the first time anyone concluded it was in the year 2368 after Adam? And if they were going to fit numbers to the title of the Lord Jesus Christ = 3168 why didn't they use that value? Or why not 888? Or why not 754, which is his title in Hebrew? Wouldn't that be what we'd expect if some "smart men" were doing this stuff? And that brings forth my real problem with your "method." You don't have any "method!" :winking0071: You have no way to know what to "expect" so you just go looking for "hits" and ignore the rest that doesn't fit.

It seems to me that you are just picking random coincidences and giving them a HUGE significance if they happen to fit your preconceived ideas and completely ignoring them if they don't fit. That's called "cherry picking" and it is the bane of all pattern hunters.


I'm convinced that English Gematria has no significance. But it is is a favorite amongst English speaking number folks since they don't have to learn those old languages,and they can find patterns everywhere all around them. Unfortunately, they are just coincidences. But some folks take them very seriously. Here's a rather thorough post (http://www.biblewheel.com/forum/showthread.php?686-English-Gematria&p=8923#post8923) where I state my reasons for rejecting it.


Great! I hope I can help. I very much enjoy finding ways to discern between chance and design in these matters.


Just to clarify the Biblical chronological date of Moses' birth (and I've broke out the calculator and the Bible, and checked for myself):

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chronology_of_the_Bible

http://www.akhlah.com/history_tradition/torah_timeline.php

http://members.home.nl/frankcolijn/frankcolijn/The_timeline.htm


In regards to when Jesus came on the scene, your assuming that Jesus actually existed...was an actual person. I don't make that assumption and there's a number of atheist/deist scholars who also argue that point.

In regards to different numbers used in different ways within the Bible, and their usage or meanings being coincidences...I will humbly disagree with you on that and will continue to present different points to explain why I disagree. I am looking forward to your perspective on the 1820 Code and its probability of being purely randomness...and from that point, we can continue further, because that research is some of the underlying "stuff" that begins to show what types of patterns were "designed" into the texts...hell...around which the text was designed.

With that said, DAMN!!!! Take it a little easier on me Mr. "Friendly Administrator"...jeez! I feel like I got chewed up and spit out in your previous post...and one of the teeth bites was on whether or not I knew (or anyone knew) the Biblically record Hebrew birth year of Moses...damn. :pray:

I would elaborate more, but I've got some ripe cherries waiting to be picked...and I love cherries :winking0071:

[Richard Amiel McGough]

Just to clarify the Biblical chronological date of Moses' birth (and I've broke out the calculator and the Bible, and checked for myself):

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chronology_of_the_Bible

http://www.akhlah.com/history_tradition/torah_timeline.php

http://members.home.nl/frankcolijn/frankcolijn/The_timeline.htm


Hey there RC,

Thanks for the links. But just to be clear, I wasn't questioning if there were folks who believed that Moses was born in 2368 AM. That's already been established. I asked why we should believe they are correct.

And looking at Frank Coljn's page (he's got lot's of fascinating numerical stuff on his site) I am reminded why no one can know the birth date of Moses even if we assume that the Bible is exactly correct in all the information it gives relating to the genealogies (which is certainly is not). The reason is very obvious - only the years are given! We don't know how many months, so on average an error of 6 months is associated with every lifespan in the list. Adam was 130 years + x1 months old when he begat Seth, and Seth was 105 years + x2 months old when he begat Enos, and so on. So by the time we get to Moses, we have to add up all the values of xn from n = 1 to 24. If the months are randomly distributed, we get an additional 12 years. The only way we could get 2368 years is if we assumed that every person in the genealogy was born no more than two weeks after the birthday of his father.

Therefore, the dates simply do not add up. I first noticed this kind of error when I was thinking why Harold Camping was so obviously wrong in his predictions. He created a "Biblical Timeline of History" and fell into his own trap because he twisted and chopped and hammered everything until he finally forced it fit his pattern, and then forgot what he had done and declared that no such patterns could have happened by chance! :hysterical:



In regards to when Jesus came on the scene, your assuming that Jesus actually existed...was an actual person. I don't make that assumption and there's a number of atheist/deist scholars who also argue that point.

I assumed no such thing. I just didn't feel a need to clutter every reference to Jesus with "if he existed." I would not predicate logical arguments with such an unstated assumption.



In regards to different numbers used in different ways within the Bible, and their usage or meanings being coincidences...I will humbly disagree with you on that and will continue to present different points to explain why I disagree. I am looking forward to your perspective on the 1820 Code and its probability of being purely randomness...and from that point, we can continue further, because that research is some of the underlying "stuff" that begins to show what types of patterns were "designed" into the texts...hell...around which the text was designed.

With that said, DAMN!!!! Take it a little easier on me Mr. "Friendly Administrator"...jeez! I feel like I got chewed up and spit out in your previous post...and one of the teeth bites was on whether or not I knew (or anyone knew) the Biblically record Hebrew birth year of Moses...damn. :pray:

I would elaborate more, but I've got some ripe cherries waiting to be picked...and I love cherries :winking0071:
Hey brother-man, I'm sorry I made you feel that way. I really was just freely expressing myself. I forget sometimes that we aren't just doing pure math or logic here, and that you might actually have a sense of attachment to the ideas you are presenting and so take it personally if I dismiss them in a seemingly abrupt fashion.

I'm trying to keep my mind open, but sometimes I feel like I'm running with scissors. The same sharp words that help me think clearly can sometimes cut others unintentionally. I'll do my best to avoid that.

All the best,

Richard