RAMcGough wrote: Sun Mar 01, 2026 7:47 pm
Hey Bill,
It's great that you are telling your story. That adds important context and really helps me understand where you are coming from.
Thank you for that. This is only a tiny part of it, of course, and telling only part of it it brings the danger of skewing people's understanding. It always makes me uncomfortable revealing persona details too, but it's unavoidable if people are to understand what drove me to do it.
RAMcGough wrote: Sun Mar 01, 2026 7:47 pm
But I strongly disagree about cherry picking is [an unavoidable element of doing gematria. There is ZERO cherry picking in my analysis of Genesis 1:1 and John 1:1. The values of the words are in the verses being analyzed. I never go scanning through long lists of words and phrases looking for "hits". I might do that as an addendum to the analysis, but it is completely independent of the analysis itself.
It depends on the information you are trying to extract. A lot of my own discoveries in G1.1 and J1.1, which individually and together contain a cornucopia of mirrored fractals, does not involve cherry picking, unless you count other possible geometries. For example, words 2 and 3 sum to 289 and words 5 and 6 (their mirror about the central Aleph-Tav) sum to 802. These are both Koch anti snowflakes, derived from triangles 496 and 946. But 289 is also the square/rhombus of 17. Is it cherry picking to focus on the antisnwflake? I would say no, because the existence of the mirrored antisnowflake justifies the choice.
But we will have to agree to disagree here. If there's a message in the NIV Bible and if it involves substituting words enumerated under one system for Biblical phrases enumerated under another, how can that be done without 'cherry picking'? You either have to accept it as inevitable or reject the whole concept of that kind of code. However, if God has indeed encoded information by this method, which you then reject, you are in danger of raising yourself above God. No slight intended, but it's an error many intellectuals make. Their intellect becomes their god, and a jealous one at that.
Note: I just reread this and it sounds as if I'm saying I have God on my side and he'll smite you if you dare disagree with me. Please don't read it that way. I had the same experience with my silent partner, incidentally and was forced to recognize what I was being too narrow in my methodology. God is infinitely creative and our linear thought processes just can't appreciate the holistic way gematria has been done.
RAMcGough wrote: Sun Mar 01, 2026 7:47 pm
bluetriangle wrote: Sat Feb 28, 2026 2:29 pm
The essence of the New Bible Code is the two-part ordinal-to-standard value system. In cryptology, the theory of codes and cyphers, the standard model for encryption and decryption is as follows:
PLAINTEXT MESSAGE
ENCRYPTION
CYPHERTEXT
DECRYPTION
PLAINTEXT MESSAGE
I see how you say it works, but there is a fundamental problem. Real encryption is LOSSLESS. The decrypted message can be determined exactly from the encrypted message. This doesn't work with gematria because almost ALL INFORMATION is lost when a word is converted to a number. You have no way to know what word was intended in the first 12 words of Genesis (NIV). All you know is the words have the value 515.
Yes, much of the information is lost, I agree. This was the closest analogy I could find, although it's more like detective work. than cracking the enigma code. But there is no way to encode information in this way - words to number to words - without losing most of the information. However, when you see that the first 24 words can be overlain with the words JESUS YEHOSHUA MESSIAH MESSIAH WORD WORD simply by splitting them into six-word strings, you can hopefully appreciate that they hold each other up. They are meaningfully related, related to the Bible and form a regular pattern.
There are ELS codes here and one of them ends on the last letter of the 24th word. It says GOD CREATED CODE. I've appended it.
RAMcGough wrote: Sun Mar 01, 2026 7:47 pm
This is the classic problem with this kind of gematria that is based fundamentally on the cognitive error called "cherry picking".
It does necessitate cherry picking, yes, but I am arguing that
1) this does not invalidate it if it is done with care, and
2) there is no other way to do it.
RAMcGough wrote: Sun Mar 01, 2026 7:47 pm
This is the classic problem with this kind of gematria that is based fundamentally on the cognitive error called "cherry picking". Take for example the system that uses a=6,b=12, c=18. It yields the following identities:
Jesus = 666 = Lucifer = Muhammad
Did God encode that?
Yes. If he made Jesus (o) = 74, and Lucifer (o) = 74, then both were encoded. I have to follow the logic of the code here. Relates to the Morning Star of course, associated with both Jesus and Lucifer.
Also
The Lord's Coming (s) = 666
God's Love (s) = 666
Satan's Hate (s) = 666
This is not the place to discuss it, but this reaches to the heart of Christian theology. And 666, as you note yourself has two sides, like Janus, the two-faced Roman god of beginnings and endings.
RAMcGough wrote: Sun Mar 01, 2026 7:47 pm
Does the phrase "ATONEMENT COVER" even appear in the NIV?
Yes, ATONEMENT COVER does appear in the NIV '84. One strong piece of evidence for the reality of the code is found in this page
https://www.thesecretcode.co.uk/page_3106950.html
I know you're busy, so you can go straight to the tables, where I show that the phrases
Ark of the Testimony
Cherubim of the Glory
Atonement Cover
Altar of Incense
are encoded over the NIV '84's first 37, 34, 24 and 14 words. There are two things to note here.
1) Of the 50-odd versions I've checked (and that includes all the most popular ones) only the NIV '84 (which contains the New Bible Code) uses these four particular titles, so there is no doubt it is self referential.
2) This is also referring to the Day of Atonement, a major theme of the NBC, because on that day only, the Altar of Incense was regarded as being part of the Most Holy Place (Hebrews 9).
RAMcGough wrote: Sun Mar 01, 2026 7:47 pm
Yes, but you could have chosen many variations to many different numbers with the same meaning.
1109 = Lord Jesus Christ
1322 = The Lord Jesus Christ
925 = Jesus Christ
1932 = Jesus Christ Son of God Savior
Etc., etc., etc. There's no end it really. I don't know how anyone could discern the "correct" or "intended" phrase from just one number.
A sceptic at this point may cry "cherry picking", because there will be many phrases with these standard values. How do we choose between them? But the context and the title in the first verse make it obvious, though unprovable, that these are the titles I was supposed to find.
I don't think I'm being "skeptical" - I think I'm simply being rational and noting the fact that there is no objective way for anyone to determine the "intended" value.
Fortunately, it is not mathematics we are doing here! It's gematria, which has its own rules and is as much an art as a science. Would you interpret dreams by the rules of mathematics?
I was once given a vision of a 'wise child', who seemed as ancient as time itself, but as fresh as a newborn baby. He said to me, very quickly,
I'M TWENTY-SIX AND I'M HERE FOR YOU
I did the ordinal value. It was 358, which mystified me at the time, because I didn't use standard values. Fortunately I wrote it down and years later discovered it was the value of
Mashiach.
That would never satisfy a mathematician. Maybe I should have used '26' instead of 'twenty-six'. Maybe 358 meant 'Nachesh'. But there was no doubt in my mind that this was the correct written version. There are 26 letters too, which supports 'twenty-six' rather than '26' and of course 26 is God (o) and YHVH.
Yes, I know what the Rabbis say about 'Yeshu' and that Yehoshua was reduced to Yeshua then Yeshu as signs of disapproval (theirs, not God's). I have a good study of it, if you're interested. But I also have no doubt it was Jesus talking to my Alpha Course director (who lived in Bethlehem for many years and was the most devoted Christian I ever knew).
As I said, I got a hint in 1 These. 5.23, the first verse of the Key, which actually has the phrase 'Our Lord Jesus Christ'.
I struggle to understand where you're coming from here, I really do. There aren't that many titles we could give to God and Jesus Christ and these would be preeminent among them anyway. The fact that two of them are ordinal values of a verse that miraculously appeared on my Alpha Course director's bookmark must surely impress you as significant. You seem at times to be playing Devil's advocate.
I think you're looking for certainty here. You said no mathematician would accept this kind of thing and mathematics is all about certainty, deductive reasoning. But we exist in a world where inductive reasoning, the primary method of analysis employed in science, is king. Mathematics is essential to science but in a messy, uncertain world, any code that manifests in the Bible will, by necessity, have to be part of that uncertainty, even if all that means is that it is probabilistic (all codes, including yours, could be a statistical fluke). I think it's significant that the code is founded on mathematics, which comes from the pure and pristine Mind of God. But it has 'incarnated' in a messy, uncertain world and so has to span both worlds.
Given the nature of the code, only one version and one edition could have been the vehicle. And only one spelling too, British English. As new editions are being created, the code is now being slowly rubbed out. But it exists in millions of copies of the NIV '84.
You say you're being rational. Richard, But should you not be being empirical?
