Principles of Pattern Detection

[RAMcGough]

What are the principles by which we can discern between chance vs design?

Are principles even needed? Or should we just believe any "pattern" that confirms what we already believe? Confirmation bias is "one hell of a drug". It's led many astray.

I have a lot to say as time permits, but I'm very busy. I just wanted to get the conversation started.

[Geert van den Bos]

Gematria about the word written with letters.

John 1:1-2 might offer the key

It reads:
Ἐν ἀρχῇ ἦν ὁ λόγος, καὶ ὁ λόγος ἦν πρὸς τὸν θεόν, καὶ θεὸς ἦν ὁ λόγος. οὗτος ἦν ἐν ἀρχῇ πρὸς τὸν θεόν.

since ὁ θεός in John's perspective is the Hebrew God, God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, the God with the four Hebrew letter name, whom Jesus called his father.

John 1:14,
Καὶ ὁ λόγος σὰρξ ἐγένετο καὶ ἐσκήνωσεν ἐν ἡμῖν

The word that was an alphanumeric construct became flesh = edible/understandable

and dwelled in us

Most translators have "among us"
https://biblehub.com/john/1-14.htm
which proves their idolatry

cf. John 14:20,
ἐν ἐκείνῃ τῇ ἡμέρᾳ γνώσεσθε ὑμεῖς ὅτι ἐγὼ ἐν τῷ πατρί μου καὶ ὑμεῖς ἐν ἐμοὶ κἀγὼ ἐν ὑμῖν.

[Alex]

Well, I think as long as you are doing the correct thing then everything will make sense.
But you should have a good understanding also of what is important in the codes of the Bible.

Here is an example:

Verse# 55 "heaven" (E o) [על כן יעזב איש את אביו ואת אמו ודבק באשתו והיו לבשר אחד]
FLW = 113 "universe" (E o)
CW = 407 "and" ואת
FLCW = 520 = 10x 52 "earth" (E o)

FLW = First & Last Words added
CW = Center Word(s)
FLCW = First, Last & Center Words added

Tri = Triangle
Hepta = Heptagon
Tiangles has 3 sides & Heptagons has 7 sides.
PP-o = Pythagoran Prime order of
Vs = Verse#
r/red = reduced
o/ord = ordinal
s/std = standard
E = English

55 is also Tri(3+7) & Hepta(5 = PP-o(37)).
Words ordered at 3 & 7 of Vs(55) = 496 = Tri(31)
Words ordered at 3 & 8 of Vs(55) = 136 = Tri(16)
3116 = 316 with an extended digit can be seen when we join the orders of these Triangles into one number.
316 = C.Tri(15 = Tri(5 = PP-o(37))) = C.Hepta(3+7) = word# 3 of ord John 1:1 + word# 7 of std Gen 1:1
= words ordered at 37, 73, 39 & 93 when counting by rotation by the number of words in cycles of ord Genesis 1:1 & ord John 1:1 = CW of Vs(777)
1, 316, 7246 are the only numbers below 3.8 million that are both a Centered Triangle & Centered Heptagon.
37 = code number for 777 = first word of Vs(117 = 7+37+73 = "seven hundred seventy and seven" (E r)) = first word of Vs(777)
38 = code number for 888
361 = 316 with mirrored last digits = C.Tri(16 "codes" קודים (o)) = C.Octa(3+7 [37 "of wisdom"])
16 & 10 in the end here also interestingly connect to the FLCW of Gen 1:1 as it is 1610 = perimeter of Heptagram(116 = CW of Vs(37x73)).
Triangles has 3 sides and Octagons has 8 sides.
So everything makes perfect sense here.

[RAMcGough]

Hey Alex,

I asked about principles. You wrote a lot of things, but I never mentioned that word. You started off by saying "Here is an example" of things you think are "important" and "make sense" so I will try to infer your "principles" from the examples you have given.

You began with the English ordinal value of the word "heaven" (E o) = 55 and used that as a "pointer" to verse #55 in the Bible and listed the values of various combinations. (BTW - it's very helpful that you listed the meanings of your abbreviations since there are so many of them!)

You then arbitrarily selected the word "universe" that has an E o value that matches the Hebrew standard value of the first and last words of verse 55. Why did you choose that word? Does it even exist in the Bible? Does it have anything to do with the actual text of verse 55? Your choice looks like a textbook example of "cherry picking". It's like you're drawing arbitrary lines between stars to create your own private constellations.There's about a 1000 English words with the same value. Here's a small sample of the just the first few words in list you selected from:

abomination = 113
abortions = 113
absurdist = 113
adversary = 113
apocalypse = 113

Given that you have thousands of unrelated arbitrary words to choose from and that you can then "connect" them with 54 arbitrary gematria methods, how is anyone supposed to discern between chance and design?

And this brings us back to the name of this thread. The Principles of Pattern Detection. Do you have any? If so, can you state them?

Great chatting!

Richard

[Alex]

First off, you will have to excuse me for seeing what I wanted in this thread.
I translated "Principles of Pattern Detection" to what makes a code valid in my head.
I was a bit geared up when I got inn here as I started testing things here and my head was just spinning a bit earlier today as I liked the Forum.

And you are correct, there are several words/phrases to pick from that has the value of 113. It's a fair question and problem you bring up here.
And the short answer to that personally is that it is a skill issue. If you have been dedicated long enough to the codes of the Bible, then you know that certain words are important after you have done tonns of testing.
Now I have to say that you are a lot more strict than me regarding proof, a lot more conservative before you will call it a code.

Before I continiue, can you give me some examples of what you would consider proof?
Is there any probability attached to that requirement?
Do you require predictability?
Do you require imperical proof also?

I don't require the two last points there, but the third point can be interesting to see.

And regarding the Principles of Pattern Detection, that is a great question.
The best I can think of now would be if you can find the pattern at the right places.
But maybe I can think of some more to say on that soon.

It's great to be back here again, and thank you for getting up the community inn here again!
Gematria is so incredible that I think we deserve a forum. I had a forum on my website but bots made it difficult to keep it as they would post pornographic links and gambling links. Beware! I hope this forum will be able to block the bots here.

[bluetriangle]

In my own work I have several guiding principles.

1. Improbability and Meaning.
A proposed code should be both improbable and meaningful. If it is meaningful but not improbable it isn’t a code. If it is improbable but not meaningful it isn’t a code. If it is improbable and meaningful it might be a code.

2. Simplicity (but not over-simplicity)
The number of enumeration systems, languages and Bible versions should all be kept to an absolute minimum. The more systems we use, the more numbers we create. I’ve been criticised for using four systems, three languages and three Scriptures (BHS, TR and NIV), but that is the unavoidable minimum for the New Bible Code. To paraphrase a famous scientist, things should be kept as simple as possible, but no simpler.

3. Alignment with Biblical Teaching.
The code would almost certainly reference Biblical text, or a major Biblical theme. I believe I have found codes outside of Scripture, so I can’t say they should always be within the Bible. But any code should support the Bible’s teachings, although not necessarily any denominational position. They can clarify them and adjudicate between differing positions.

4. Repetition
Repetition is important, because any one connection could be chance. When it is found over and again and when it connects to other findings to form meaningful confluences we can have more confidence in it. This repetition can be at different scales and using different enumeration systems (see my comments below on fractals).

5. Patterns
Codes should align and interlock with others to form larger patterns. A single number means nothing, but a patterned confluence of numbers might mean a lot. These confluences can include numbers of words and letters, positional values and chapter and verse indicators. The Biblical meaning of numbers is also important.

6. Symmetry
I’ve found codes at the exact midpoints of scripture and at either end. Symmetry is itself an indicator of design but it also greatly reduces the probability of chance hits. If numbers are pinned to the opening words of the Bible, for example, there is little scope for cherry picking.

7. Rationality
The laws of rational thought should be applied with rigour. God is infinitely creative and it shows in the codes, but they always obey the rules of logic and mathematics. The mathematical basis of the code is both numerical and geometric and often utilises constructions in numerical geometry, factors, concatenated numbers and mirrored numbers.

8. Fractals
The codes employ fractals, encoded as numbers that can be displayed as digital versions of fractals. Fractals are defined as showing self-similarity at different scales and the codes have this feature too, the same idea often reappearing in different enumeration systems. Fractals are a signature of authentic codes and I believe they were placed in Scrioture by something resembling modern methods of fractal compression.

9. Primacy
There appears to be a primacy principle, where the numerical value of the first Biblical instance of any word or title is employed in certain codes, rather than alternative spellings or titles. This helps defeat accusations of cherry picking.

10. Revelation
Codes don’t just confirm Biblical truths to fortify belief in an age of scepticism and scientism: they convey new information from the Divine (and at the appointed time), assisting in scriptural exegesis, interpreting prophesies and containing new revelations. God would not be God if he could not surprise us.

I can give examples of each principle, if anyone wishes.

[RAMcGough]

First off, you will have to excuse me for seeing what I wanted in this thread.
I translated "Principles of Pattern Detection" to what makes a code valid in my head.
I was a bit geared up when I got inn here as I started testing things here and my head was just spinning a bit earlier today as I liked the Forum.

And you are correct, there are several words/phrases to pick from that has the value of 113. It's a fair question and problem you bring up here.
And the short answer to that personally is that it is a skill issue. If you have been dedicated long enough to the codes of the Bible, then you know that certain words are important after you have done tonns of testing.
Now I have to say that you are a lot more strict than me regarding proof, a lot more conservative before you will call it a code.

Before I continiue, can you give me some examples of what you would consider proof?
Is there any probability attached to that requirement?
Do you require predictability?
Do you require imperical proof also?

Hey Alex,

I appreciate your answers. I'm glad you explained where you're coming from.

I don't see how cherry picking could be a "skill issue". It strikes me as an intellectual error.

My work exemplifies the principles I use. My central claims are based on ONE gematria method - the standard values. I mention a ordinal values a few times because they were so striking (e.g. hokmah o/s = 37/73) but I wouldn't even mention them in a presentation intended as proof for a skeptical audience. This is because we multiply the space of possible random numbers with each new gematria method. When it comes to real proof, we must limit the space of possibilities to the smallest set possible. My target audience is serious intellectuals with advanced understanding of mathematics and probabilities.

And regarding the Principles of Pattern Detection, that is a great question.
The best I can think of now would be if you can find the pattern at the right places.
But maybe I can think of some more to say on that soon.

It's great to be back here again, and thank you for getting up the community inn here again!
Gematria is so incredible that I think we deserve a forum. I had a forum on my website but bots made it difficult to keep it as they would post pornographic links and gambling links. Beware! I hope this forum will be able to block the bots here.

Do you understand the concept of "principles"? Identifying and avoiding "cherry picking" is central to my claims. Another is self-referential reiteration. The most convincing patterns reveal an coherence & self-reference to establish the meaning of the numbers. The best example is the Unity Holograph. It is the premier statement of God's unity in the entire Bible. It is structured on reiterative patterns based on the numerical value of its central claim:

13 = ONE (echad)
13 x 2 = 26 = YHVH
13 x 3 = 39 = YHVH echad (The LORD is ONE) = ONE x 3 => TRINITY
13 x 86 = 1118 = ONE (13) x ELOHIM (86) = Sum of the Shema

The central message of the Shema is reiteratively encoded in the Shema. This establishes the primary meaning of the Number 13 in Scripture. The command to LOVE the Lord that follows amplifies the meaning beyond all measure:

ONE (echad) = 13 = LOVE (ahavah)

Then we see the LOVE CHAPTER in 1 Corinthians marked by this number. It is the 13 chapter. It contains 13 verses. And the last verse is structure on a pattern of 3 and 1 (These three abide, faith, hope and love, but the greatest is love).

I experience these patterns as gazing into the infinite mind of God. They are supernaturally self-integrated with divine unity. And note - I didn't have to go outside the text of the Shema for anything! It is self-contained. This is a fundamental principle that guides my work.

[RAMcGough]

In my own work I have several guiding principles.

Thanks Bill! Great post. Some excellent grist for our mill.

2. Simplicity (but not over-simplicity)
The number of enumeration systems, languages and Bible versions should all be kept to an absolute minimum. The more systems we use, the more numbers we create. I’ve been criticised for using four systems, three languages and three Scriptures (BHS, TR and NIV), but that is the unavoidable minimum for the New Bible Code. To paraphrase a famous scientist, things should be kept as simple as possible, but no simpler.

Agreed, 100%! That's why if I were to create a presentation designed to convince a skeptic, I would limit myself to the original Hebrew/Greek text analyzed with a single gematria method (standard). I also would limit the analysis to words found in the text being analyzed. E.g. The Unity Holograph is based on a set of nested, semantically coherent values that are multiples of its central claim (ONE = echad = 13) and the claim that YHVH echad = 39 = 3 x 13, etc. as shown in the post above.

I really like your open style of discourse. You listed the weaknesses of the "New Bible Code". That's wise, because those are the very reasons it strikes me as "cherry picking". This is amplified by one thing you didn't mention - the very low a priori probability that God would encode a particular English text (NIV 84) that is now out of date.

3. Alignment with Biblical Teaching.
The code would almost certainly reference Biblical text, or a major Biblical theme. I believe I have found codes outside of Scripture, so I can’t say they should always be within the Bible. But any code should support the Bible’s teachings, although not necessarily any denominational position. They can clarify them and adjudicate between differing positions.

This touches on another aspect that seems extremely "cherry picked". The reference to modern political figures like Osama bin Ladin and the Pope. Neither are biblical.

4. Repetition
Repetition is important, because any one connection could be chance. When it is found over and again and when it connects to other findings to form meaningful confluences we can have more confidence in it. This repetition can be at different scales and using different enumeration systems (see my comments below on fractals).

5. Patterns
Codes should align and interlock with others to form larger patterns. A single number means nothing, but a patterned confluence of numbers might mean a lot. These confluences can include numbers of words and letters, positional values and chapter and verse indicators. The Biblical meaning of numbers is also important.

6. Symmetry
I’ve found codes at the exact midpoints of scripture and at either end. Symmetry is itself an indicator of design but it also greatly reduces the probability of chance hits. If numbers are pinned to the opening words of the Bible, for example, there is little scope for cherry picking.

Yes, those are excellent principles, especially when repetition is understood in the sense of self-reflective reiteration within a single passage or group of passages (e.g. the union of Genesis 1.1-5 and John 1.1-5) as shown here:


https://www.biblewheel.com/GR/GR_Creation_Hyper.php

But note - at least 40% of natural numbers can be written as figurate numbers like trefoils, hexagons, and variants of them. To me, this means there is very little significance outside of their presence in reiterative integrated structures. Like this:

Genesis 1.1 = 2701 = T(73) = 37 x 73 = H(4) x S(4) = 3T(36) + H(3) x S(3)

It's the most astoundingly compressed & reiterative alphanumeric structure I've ever seen. And that's just a tiny fraction of it.

Again, thanks for the great post Bill!

[Alex]

Yes, that is one way to do it.
But there are many paths in these codes and well, let me show you how important the word universe is in the codes.

TV of Gen 1:1 = 2701
CW of Gen 1:1 = 401
mirror of 2701 = 1072 "universe" (E s)
mirror of 401 = 104 "and the earth" (E o)

Notice that this compliments the connection of Tri(37) placed in the center of Tri(73) since 37 is connected to ordinal & 73 to standard.
And total values (TV) and Center Words (CW) are extremely important in the codes.

red 2 last words of Gen 1:1 (which is "and the earth") = 28 "and the universe" ואת היקום (r)
red Gen 1:1 = 82 "and the universe" ואת היקום (o)

perimeter of Tri(73) = 216 "universe" יקום (o+s)
perimeter of Tri(37) = 108 = perimeter of Squ(28 "and the earth" ואת הארץ (r))

ord Gen 1:1 = 298 "universe" יקום (Fs)

All in one verse.

FLW of Vs(1172 "the universe" (E s)) = 841 "the universe" ο συμπαν

Here is my version of the Creation Holograph
https://777codes.com/index.php/genesis- ... hn-1-1/#B1

[bluetriangle]

Thanks Bill! Great post. Some excellent grist for our mill.

I’m glad you like it. I wasn’t sure if this was what you wanted. It’s strangely difficult to articulate principles you are abiding by, even when you are using them all the time. I think this thread could be of great value, particularly to new researchers, as I had no such guidance and made many mistakes at first. The nearest I had to a mentor was Vernon, who did us all a great service with the quality of his work.

2. Simplicity (but not over-simplicity)
Agreed, 100%! That's why if I were to create a presentation designed to convince a skeptic, I would limit myself to the original Hebrew/Greek text analyzed with a single gematria method (standard). I also would limit the analysis to words found in the text being analyzed.

So would I. In fact that is exactly what I have done at times in my writings and at the very least I will always feature the Hebrew Genesis 1.1, what I call the Creation Seal (G1.1 + John 1.1) and the Logos Star within what I call the Creation Snowflake.

E.g. The Unity Holograph is based on a set of nested, semantically coherent values that are multiples of its central claim (ONE = echad = 13) and the claim that YHVH echad = 39 = 3 x 13, etc. as shown in the post above.

Yes, I like the Unity Holograph. The fact that 13 is also the first hexagram with structure adds to its impact. I should note here that Lord God (r) = 39.

I really like your open style of discourse. You listed the weaknesses of the "New Bible Code". That's wise, because those are the very reasons it strikes me as "cherry picking". This is amplified by one thing you didn't mention - the very low a priori probability that God would encode a particular English text (NIV 84) that is now out of date.

All that interests me is the truth. If you want to discuss cherry picking then I’m happy to do that (maybe on another thread). I would argue that the ‘weakness’ isn’t so much a flaw as a necessary minimum number of languages and systems to convey the information it contains. Most of the code is in a translation of words already written, so the task of conveying new information through it necessitated using more systems of gematria (I was taught the combined system as I worked on the code). The amount of information encoded within Gen. 1.1-5 is incredible and must have employed something akin to fractal compression or holography. The Bible is founded on the rock of mathematical truth and it offers us a valuable glimpse of the Mind of God.

Why would God not encode the NIV? It was and probably still is the most popular modern English Bible translation and now outsells even the KJV. English itself is the modern lingua Franca. If God did encode a modern version the NIV was the obvious choice. Given that it concerns Millennial events it would also make sense to encode a very recent version. Yes, God exists beyond time, but I think the way the code came about suggests that there may be multiple possibilities for the precise expression of an event (9/11) that was going to happen. A very recent version was the best way to encode last minute details.

It doesn’t matter if the NIV ‘84 is now out of date and the code is being slowly erased. There are millions of copies of the NIV ‘84 still in existence.

3. Alignment with Biblical Teaching.
This touches on another aspect that seems extremely "cherry picked". The reference to modern political figures like Osama bin Ladin and the Pope. Neither are biblical.

I was shown who these two men really were, or represented, in a vision in 2002 and obeyed the Spirit’s directives in this and many other ways. I could never have done this without an enormous amount of spiritual assistance. What people make of it is up to them but I will say that these men exemplified the two Divine attributes of justice and mercy recognised by all three Abrahamic religions. The lives of both men were encoded to an extraordinary degree and you may recall that they were connected in the end by the death of bin Laden on the same day that Pope John Paul II was beatified. That day, 5/1/11, was the most npencoded date I have ever found. For example it was the 3773rd day of the 3rd Millennium.

4. Repetition
Repetition is important, because any one connection could be chance. When it is found over and again and when it connects to other findings to form meaningful confluences we can have more confidence in it. This repetition can be at different scales and using different enumeration systems (see my comments below on fractals).

5. Patterns
Codes should align and interlock with others to form larger patterns. A single number means nothing, but a patterned confluence of numbers might mean a lot. These confluences can include numbers of words and letters, positional values and chapter and verse indicators. The Biblical meaning of numbers is also important.

6. Symmetry
I’ve found codes at the exact midpoints of scripture and at either end. Symmetry is itself an indicator of design but it also greatly reduces the probability of chance hits. If numbers are pinned to the opening words of the Bible, for example, there is little scope for cherry picking.
Yes, those are excellent principles, especially when repetition is understood in the sense of self-reflective reiteration within a single passage or group of passages (e.g. the union of Genesis 1.1-5 and John 1.1-5) as shown here:


https://www.biblewheel.com/GR/GR_Creation_Hyper.php

I’ll study this holograph. I had’nt really looked at it before.

But note - at least 40% of natural numbers can be written as figurate numbers like trefoils, hexagons, and variants of them. To me, this means there is very little significance outside of their presence in reiterative integrated structures. Like this:

Genesis 1.1 = 2701 = T(73) = 37 x 73 = H(4) x S(4) = 3T(36) + H(3) x S(3)

It's the most astoundingly compressed & reiterative alphanumeric structure I've ever seen. And that's just a tiny fraction of it.

Again, thanks for the great post Bill!

I would argue that every number except 2 is figurate as we can create an infinite sequence of polygons and centred polygons with 3, 4, 5, 6 . . . 20 . . . . 1000 . . . . sides.

That is one reason I nearly always stop at hexagonal figures. I have one centred dodecagon (which represents The Sea in the Tabernacke courtyard) but that’s about it.