Replies

Let me start out by stating up front that I believe a fair assessment of this topic would conclude the jury is still out. To my knowledge, unless there has been information to the contrary published in the last year or so there has been no stake driven through the heart of the "codes". To anyone who has an opinion to the contrary, I am more than willing to entertain a polite, reasoned argument. A reasonable - and very important - starting point would be to define terms.

The issue of the "Bible Codes" is an interesting one but there is a great deal of misinformation as to exactly what constitutes the "codes" (thus the quotation marks). As a result, a large number of absolute statements have been made on this thread without bothering to qualify (or justify) the scope of the argument. I believe I can correctly say that most if not all of the confusion (at least on this thread) centers around the role of equidistant letter sequences (ELSs).

There are a great many people (including the author of the subject article it seems) who would assert the code takes the form of meaningful phrases, as one might read from a fortune cookie, spelled out through ELSs. In that sense, one would be left to conclude the code was the ELS (or set of all ELSs). A majority of the popular material on the Codes seems to fall in that vein. I believe it is safe to say that the "pro-code" Drosnin and most, if not all, of the popular "code debunkers" boil down to this approach, also. (See, for instance post 25, of this thread.) [I have not read Drosnin - I can assume with confidence that someone will correct me if I'm mistaken.] These approaches, either pro or con, I believe exhibit a rather naive understanding of the subject and certainly a serious lack of inquiry on the refereed research being done.

To the point, ELSs are not of themselves "The Code". If you will, ELSs are the alphabet of the code. The "code" relates to the relationship between pairings of ELSs. Thus, it is no more legitimate to debunk the codes by attacking ELSs than it is to dismiss the works of Shakespeare because he "spelled funny" or employed phraseology odd to our ear.

For those who are interested, Satinover's work presents a somewhat balanced overview of this. As to full disclosure, he was favorably impressed enough to write a book about it. On the other hand, he does go out of his way to present criticisms of it, also. I have read one otherwise unverified report that he since has changed his mind although I haven't seen him say it himself. (If anyone has any direct reference to this, I'd very much appreciate a ping.)

Another area of debate relates to the "purpose", or usefulness, of the code if it exists. Most of the supportable evidence I have seen (primarily Satinover and some of the refereed statistical papers) favors the suggestion that the code may be presented as a method for validating the Authorship of the Scriptures from which it is taken - to allow the Thomases among us to put our hand in the side of the Christ, in New Testament terms. The modern analog of this would be a digital watermark hidden within an image; no real message other than "I Am that I Am".

It also tends to suggest that the code is not particularly useful for predicting the future - which would be contrary to scriptural precepts - since the code text would have to be largely known a priori. That isn't to say it couldn't be done. It might be useful in an expedient sense to select between imminent choices, for instance. [One of the more persistent rumors about the "Code" says the ultimate reason Israel didn't jump with both feet into the middle of Desert Storm after the launch of the first few Iraqi Scuds was that there was encoded information on the attacks which convinced the Mossad that no WMDs would be involved and no Israeli citizens would killed.]

That isn't to say I'm convinced the "Code" is legitimate. What I can say is that there is a great deal of pontificating on the subject, both for and against, that is so ill informed as to be a parody of itself. As for me, I already believe Scripture to be the inspired Word of God. If the Bible Codes were discredited beyond a shadow of a doubt in the next five minutes it would not diminish my faith one iota.