Posted on 11/25/2010 8:28:45 PM PST by Quix
Precipitating a Moment of Truth
Is there validity to the alleged phenomenon of Bible codes, or not? In the last two months, BCD again submitted this question to extensive testing. The results: Without a doubt, the phenomenon is real. How can we be so certain? After all, there are some highly intelligent and respected scientists who have vehemently asserted that the entire thing is a hoax. Yet, if you carefully examine their arguments, they do not address the real question at hand. What they say, in effect, is that people can find such codes in any text. Yes, that is a solid half-truth. But, it is only half of the truth.
How do we find out the other half of the truth? It all depends on whether or not those short equidistant letter sequences (ELSs) of the type that Drosnin has presented are part of longer ELSs in good Hebrew, or not. And if they are, how long are these extended codes, and what is the rate of discovery of extensions to the shorter ELSs previously found? Yet prominent code skeptics won't even check this out, or if they have, they aren't disclosing their results. We challenged them to do so some time ago. There has been no response, and we don't expect one — because they know full well that the discovery of lengthy codes in non-encoded texts is a rare occurrence. So whatever they could come up with would not begin to compare with the high frequency of lengthy codes discovered by Bible code researchers.
The key question is: "Is the short ELS I have found only a part of a (much) longer ELS, or not?" Suppose a code researcher has found a search term as an ELS with a skip of +10. He then collects every tenth letter before and after his six-letter-long ELS. He has two opportunities to find an extension (a phrase or sentence in good Hebrew) to the original ELS, one before and one after the original search term. If he finds an extension, this presents an additional opportunity to discover another extension beyond the one that has just been found.
In the past two months, we examined 54 original search terms about Jesus (from a list of two-Hebrew-word terms that had already been discovered in the vicinity of Isaiah 53, and that was previously published on page 63 of Bible Code Bombshell). The discovery rate was 50.0%, an exceptionally significant excess over the non-encoded discovery rate of 19.4%. And the content of most of these codes is clearly on topic.
Let's take a specific example. Four years ago when we were looking for ELSs in Isaiah 53, the two Hebrew words meaning "living water" were searched for and two occurrences were discovered. The first had a skip of -2,976 and the second a skip of +3,277. When Dr. Jacobi examined the string of Hebrew letters before and after the "living water" ELS with a skip of -2,976, he found three coherent phrases within that string, as illustrated in the following table:
The above extensions, and the original term, make up a 25-letter-long code.
When Dr. Jacobi examined the string of Hebrew letters before and after the "living water" ELS with a skip of +3,277, he found one coherent phrase right before "living water."
When Jacobi examined the string of Hebrew letters before and after the "who is the messiah?" ELS with a skip of -5,760, he found five coherent phrases before that ELS, and four coherent phrases after it.
The very high density of lengthy on-topic codes in this collection is well beyond anything we had thought possible, based on prior investigations. In a scientific paper we presented a few years ago, we submitted a series of 50 letter strings around original search terms (the names of Islamic countries) to our Hebrew experts, without them knowing that any were from a non-Biblical text. The discovery rate from the non-Biblical text (a translation of Tolstoy’s War and Peace into Hebrew) was 19.4%, demonstrating that extended codes can be found in a non-encoded text — at a certain rate. The discovery rate from the book of Ezekiel was 27.0%, 39.2% higher. This was a sizeable difference, but not enough to be conclusive regarding the potential reality of the phenomenon of Bible codes.
We have since examined three different groups of search terms for possible extensions and have consistently observed discovery rates that were noticeably greater than the 19.4% from the non-encoded control text of War and Peace. The chart below provides a comparison of these discovery rates.
The discovery rates from the two Isaiah 53 searches were so dramatically greater than that from the non-encoded control text that either one, by itself, provides conclusive proof of the validity of the phenomena of Bible codes.
The chart below discloses the specifics behind the above graph.
We developed a Markov chain computer model in Appendix B of the scientific paper to determine what the chances were that discovery rates as high as those observed in the Biblical texts could be the result of chance variation. If the underlying discovery rate from a non-encoded text is 19.4%, then what is the probability that the second Isaiah 53 search we had just completed would result in a 50% discovery rate? We ran 100,000 trials of an examination of 54 initial search terms, and compiled the number of trials that resulted in each possible number of extensions. The results all fell within the bell-shaped curve on the left side of the graph below, with an average number of 26 extensions and a maximum number of 54 extensions. This was in stark contrast to the 108 total extensions discovered during the second Isaiah 53 search (noted at the far right of the graph below).
The table below shows the full results of this computer simulation. Out of 100,000 simulations of an examination of 54 original search terms for possible extensions, none resulted in 55 or more total extensions.
From the above, it is appropriate to conclude that the odds that chance could result in the discovery of 108 or more extensions are essentially zero. The rational conclusion is that the phenomenon of Bible codes has substantive validity.
We fit a mathematical curve to the results from the above table that very closely followed the number of trials for results with 40 or more extensions, and estimated the odds of chance occurrence of 108 or more extensions as less than one in a trillion times a trillion.
Code Skeptics Evade the Real Issue
Code skeptics obscure the real issue by making statements that implicitly assume that all ELSs are comparable in terms of their probability of random occurrence. They would have people believe that a three-letter-long ELS of a Hebrew word is no more likely to be due to chance than a 200-letter-long ELS consisting of eight sentences in good Hebrew that are highly coherent in their content. Yet, it is obvious that the latter would naturally be far more rare than the former. The first is like a dandelion, the second like an extensive, well-tended botanical garden. The first is an everyday accident, the second is the result of a great amount of planning, planting and maintenance. The first is like anyone who first picks up a golf club to try playing the game, the second, like Tiger Woods.
Just how rare or common a given ELS is depends on its length and content. Based on previous analysis done by BCD, given any collection of original search terms, we have a very clear definition of how many extended ELSs of different lengths we might expect to find in a non-encoded text. These expectations can then be compared with the results of searching a group of original search terms for possible extensions.
Focusing on the Real Issue
In our latest investigation, we examined 54 original search terms for possible extensions. The five longest extended codes we found were 75, 64, 59, 55 and 54 letters, respectively. We know, approximately, how long the five longest extended codes would be if we had been searching in a non-encoded text, because we have done such searches, with the Hebrew expert not knowing that the search text wasn't the Bible. From a non-encoded text, we would expect that the five longest extended codes would be 25, 22, 19, 17 and 16 letters long, respectively. Or something quite similar to that. In short, the longest extended codes found in this new Isaiah 53 search are three times as long as those expected from a non-encoded text. How could they be three times as long? It is because they were intentionally encoded. Chance cannot explain this large a difference in the length of the longest ELSs discovered from examining 54 original search terms for extensions.
From this most recent search for extensions, we would expect that 17.7 of these search terms would have one or more extensions. We actually found 33, or 87% more than expected. We would also expect that 4.6 would have two or more extensions. Yet, we actually found 26 with two or more extensions, or 463% more than expected. Furthermore, we found 15 with three or more extensions, 1,277% more than expected by chance. And the percentage excess rapidly gets bigger as we only look at the ELSs with the most extensions. The next table summarizes these comparisons.
From the above table, we see that the expected number of final ELSs with eight or more extensions that could be found from searching 54 original search terms in a non-encoded text is 0.0005. That means that, on average, you would have to examine 2,000 different sets of 54 search terms to find just one extended ELS with eight or more extensions. And, on average, you would have to examine eight billion different sets of 54 search terms to find three extended ELSs with eight or more extensions. However, we didn't check out eight billion different sets of 54 search terms. We only checked out one such set. So you can begin to get some idea of how improbable the new set of Isaiah 53 findings actually is.
Yes, I have long standing written permission to post such on FR.
I had a lot of statistics in my PhD dissertation which I understood quite well enough at the time. It is not my strength.
I mostly understand the statistics of the Bible Codes--though probably not well enough to convincingly answer detailed professional questions about them. I leave that to the mathematicians hereon who may be inclined to do so.
The Comedian is likely quite capable of doing so but also busy with his own webbot fish to fry. So, anyone else willing to step up to the plate, is more than welcome.
I have tended to find the wording of a lot of the Codes mysterious and cryptic, linguistically awkward enough to not be overly enthusiastic about them.
However, a lot of Biblical prophecy is similarly cryptic and awkward linguistically.
In any case, at this point, it looks to me like the art and science of the Bible Codes has progressed a lot since my last long look.
I certainly still believe that there is something authentic and supernaturally going on that God placed in Scripture long ago and that was designed to be revealed in these end times as yet another confirmaton of His Word being true.
The noise about them being nonsense or some sort of EXTRA questionable occultic or whatever layered on top of the Scripture is utter unmitigated irrational nonsense.
They are INHERENT IN THE VERY TEXT OF THE SCRIPTURE, inherently part and parcel of the Word of God. They are inseperable from the Word of God. The only explanation that makes the least bit of sense is that Holy Spirit, unbounded by time and all knowing, the author of Scripture deliberately placed them there.
Anyway--may they be used of Holy Spirit to draw folks to the truth of Scripture and awaken some to the realities of the END TIMES age we live in.
END TIMES/ DREAMS/ VISIONS/ PROPHECY
PING to a recent article on the validity of the Bible Codes.
Other recent articles from the site will hopefully be put in the thread below.
This “approach” to learning about God is ridiculous.
Given enough symbols, picked through with the “right” formula, you can get the equivalent of “God is Satan in disguise” or “Reagan was Satan” in Hebrew.
If you skip enough letters, any crazy thing can be (mis-) constructed.
I gather you haven’t examined the evidence at all.
The thing that strikes me as
MOST RIDICULOUS
is your assertion in the face of massive piles of evidence otherwise.
This stuff is quite nice, however suggestions of a supernatural influence in the composition of the original text can only go so far. The vastly more important issue to mankind is the truth of its face message.
My problem with the idea of Bible codes is that, to me, it goes against the very nature of the Bible.
The Bible - God speaking to mankind through inspired writers - is all about clarity and openness. The information God wishes to broadcast is open to anyone and everyone who is willing to listen.
The codes thing, however, is a specialized and secretive knowledge that few have the time or resources to learn. To me, that sounds more like gnosticism then early Christianity.
God’s desire it to communicate, openly and freely. That is why He sent His Son... a man - so he could reveal Himself more clearly and fully.
Why would He turn around and hide stuff in code???
And why would it take 2,000 years to discover it???
I’m looking forward to seeing the extensive research YOU have conducted to support your assertion. With what “right” formula did you begin your investigation?
Sounds like another effort to separate out the H2O content from ice.
Certainly the surface text is the most important etc. etc. in communicating the truth of The Gospel to a hurting world.
It still smacks wonderfully of the majesty of God that He obviously engineered this bit of incredible confirmation to the surface text inherently embedded in that very text.
And, that it . . . uhhh . . . surfaces . . .
in a very scientific way for a very scientific age smack in the middle of the END TIMES.
I’m unconvinced either-way... however, I do think that perhaps it would be wiser to look at what is readily apparent in God’s word, and understanding & applying it before searching for more obscure things therein.
Granted not everyone will read something the same way; so given any particular passage there may be widely varying interpretations of differing popularity. {This is due to our fallen nature corrupting language itself; while some may be content to possibly understand another, perfect communication is that which is impossible to misunderstand.} All one has to do to verify this is look at the Second Amendment which says: “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”
There are essentially three ways to interpret it:
1) It secures the rights to the people insofar as they are in the militia (essentially only acknowledging the militia).
2) It is the People, being Citizens [of a free state], who have this right officially acknowledged/guaranteed.
3) It is people, being all members of humanity, whose rights are being officially acknowledged/guaranteed.
If fortunetelling meant truth, why is a fortunetelling spirit condemned in the New Testament?
Sheesh.
1. Have you missed Daniel’s sealed secret text mentioned in Daniel?
2. It strikes me as exactly like the God of The Bible to show HIS TIMELESS MAJESTY in such a way precisely in this ‘scientific’ END TIMES ERA in precisely this scientific way.
3. Isaac Newton suspected such and did some prelimiary ponderings and experimentings well before computers as did a Rabbi or two.
4. Nothing gnostic about it at all. God’s surface text mentions a number of times that God hides things from such as pharisees etc.
5. And, that he hides buried treasure to be dug out by seriously interested faithful followers.
6.The Codes are a great way to affirm the validity of the surface text.
7. The discovery in this END TIMES ERA is precisely the sort of phenomenon which has a chance to speak to the mentality of this crucial era.
INDEED.
It’s always slightly interesting to me . . . how the naysayers crawl out of the woodwork with rarely a shred of even a slightly well thought out argument, much less any significant understanding of the art and science of the Codes.
Yet they expect respect for their rabidly biased personal opinions. Sigh.
There’s not a shred of occultic anything regarding the Codes.
There’s certainly not a shred of fortune telling.
Sheesh.
Please at least acquaint yourself with the topic before throwing rocks.
Feel free to tell God you think it’s dumb or unwise of Him to have bothered with the Bible Codes at all.
One could quite easily bring an occultic thinking to a Codes-only approach to the bible text.
Does the Bible code tell you how many ALLCAPS to use? I haven’t quite mastered that.
As soon as you tell God it was “stupid” to allow the devil to come into existence.
How do bible code techniques handle textual variations?
One can bring occultic thinking to how the folks sitting at the next table in a restaurant handle their salt shaker.
Therefore?
And where did you dig up this notion of a
“Codes only” approach to the Bible text???
Do you have a kennel full of straw dogs?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.