Signature of The Creator. The Torah contains an ancient embedded "Security Code".

a reply to: AutisticEvo

And the torah also contains many complicated mathematical theorems

a reply to: chr0naut

Famtastic response, well done...

Also, I found the Koinoina links very helpful, thank you.

a reply to: dashen

Perhaps this 'checksum code' was known to the religious leaders, or to other mystic guardians of the scripture, and thus was a simple means for testing whether a scribe had corrupted the text. If the wording is not exact, the code will fall apart, demonstrating the text to be worthless. This is particularly interesting to me, as in the New Testament, Jesus referred to the Law (Books of Moses, Torah) as being of vital importance, that not one word would pass away, that every 'jot & tittle' (form of punctuation & the accents on the letters) was important. I see the checksum code as being the most simple code in evidence, and it seems to be for referential purposes rather than mystic relevance; to retain the integrity of the text - I imagine that the scribe's errors could be pinpointed & found within a certain part of the text based on when/where the checksum unravels.

I have come across other examples of encoding (eqully/ even more amazing than the wonderful examples provided by Chronaut) which have proven to me, beyond doubt, that there is something unalterably profound about not only the esoteric meanings of the text, but also the esoteric meanings of the letter forms themselves. With regards to the Torah in its proper context, I see that the literal reading provides a straightforward means to enact a godly lifestyle, the first subtle reading provides the path of mystic communion, the second subtle reading provides indisputable proof of the depth of coding & perhaps shines a light on our secret history, and the third subtle reading - who knows when we shall uncover all of this fully - will provide the secrets of spacetime, beyond our four dimensions, up into the metaphysical realms, onward to the heart of God. I'm describing this very loosely, it deserves a much better treatment than I give here, but I'm just trying to get across the significance of the various layers of code.

There is more to uncover, and I hope that we will unravel its secrets in such a way as to convince the world of the realities involved. This thread has inspired me to consider writing another thread, describing some of the other features I'm remembering... Hmm...

a reply to: FlyInTheOintment

Sir Isaac Newton in his studies of the Torah even said that it is a cipher.
but this code was only discovered in the past century

a reply to: Woodcarver

Why do you assume that the checksum is contrived to secure the Torah as an authority? That's surely an invalid assumption, as it speaks to your bias that authority is sought, when in actuality, a far more benign reason could have been behind the need for a checksum! Such as, the persons responsible for ensuring the text remain whole & unaltered, wanted to do so because the books together, as they were a single whole, carried something to offer to the reader, to the priest & the layman alike, something good & useful for their lives. Just what that benefit is, is up for debate. But surely anyone can see that you cannot make the assumption regarding motive, simply using the existence of the checksum - you have done so in the negative, assuming some draconian, sinister need to garner a position of authority - the polar opposite could be (and imho likely is) the truth: that there is a benevolent message embedded in the text, and that it speaks to some higher purpose in shaping the collective life of mankind. There is no reason or right to presume the negative - which you have (quite acidly) done.

a reply to: dashen

I love reading about this, we have only just begun to scratch the surface imho. As for Isaac Newton, many modern scientists would shudder if they knew how much of his life he devoted to the study of astrology, and - as you rightly say - to cracking the cipher he had seen scraps of evidence for in the scripture.

a reply to: Sigismundus

Would you kindly learn to quote properly already? I mean, come on! Use tags, a very simple process. Observe:

This is a quote...

QUOTE This is not a quote UNQUOTE

Do you see? Or is it far too menial a task?

Onward to matters of greater relevance: Why do you keep muddying the waters, with your long-winded rambles? Why are you claiming that the true Torah is not possibly in possession of codes? Why do you ignore the TRUE Torah which is under discussion, instead referring to a crappily assorted bunch of texts with thousands of errors and inconsistencies, which thus cannot be in possession of much in the way of the original encoding? This nonsense misdirection persists in all your QUOTEFAIL glory, across dozens of posts, despite the simple, honest rebuttals from Dashen which echo almost as consistently as the genuine Torah echoes its own truth (and codes).

The rebuttal is simple, and forceful, and you keep ignoring it with your drive-by, encyclopedic scattergun misinformation blasts - the crappy texts you keep referencing are not the original Torah, but are shoddily compiled & perverted versions spawned by 'heretical' offshoot cults. They are irrelevant to the search for encoded information in the Torah, except to demonstrate what happens when people can't be bothered to fully understand what's in their hands, or to embark on a deluded quest to alter what is known to be the true expression of the form of the inherited religion (heresy).

The rebuttal is simple, but you have not answered it sufficiently. It seems you can't help yourself... You have to regurgitate so much information about the (effectively heretical) Torah mis-copies that we end up with a situation in which honest folk give up trying to see into the exciting world of the Torah codes - crushed under the weight of pseudo-academic misdirection, they can end up relinquishing their hold on the arguments of the OP, purely as a result of your hyperbolic, self-referential appeal to authority.

You appear to have no answer other than to flood the thread with further irrelevant information (the irrelevant, crappy copies of the Torah, and all history connected to them - which does not amount to relevance, however much you spout).

The point here is that the surviving Torah, that most commonly inherited, that which is pure in its generations & is not related to any offshoot cults, neither beleagured with their misrepresentations & misunderstanding - that TRUE surviving Torah, in many ways, has information encoded within the structure of the text, and even within methods of the use of the letter-forms themselves, with this encoding likely extending far beyond what we've already uncovered.

You appear to have an agenda of the most pernicious sort, in that you seek to steer people away from information which is capable of bringing the soul of man closer to wonder, to the mysteries of the divine, or even to simple, interesting mysteries of the mind, of history & the quest for insight, for truth, for purpose.

Quit drivelling your second-rate history lessons, and let people explore in peace. You are doing a disservice to intellectual enquiry. If you were simply drawing attention to the other texts & questioning their relation to the original, to the 'pure' Torah, that would be fine; however, you are selectively using your knowledge (I am guessing, even though you know what we're dealing with) as a weapon to detract from truths which are highly important, and which can be made the province of everyman - or at least could be, if it weren't for people like you ruining the flow of effort.

a reply to: FlyInTheOintment

A very succinct and apt description I believe.

a reply to: FlyInTheOintment

Hey Fly

You wrote: QUOTE "The rebuttal is simple, and forceful, and you keep ignoring it with your drive-by, encyclopedic scattergun misinformation blasts - the crappy texts you keep referencing are not the original Torah, but are shoddily compiled & perverted versions spawned by 'heretical' offshoot cults. They are irrelevant to the search for encoded information in the Torah, except to demonstrate what happens when people can't be bothered to fully understand what's in their hands, or to embark on a deluded quest to alter what is known to be the true expression of the form of the inherited religion (heresy). " UNQUOTE

Methinks the lady doth protest a little too much. And the rebuttals I've seen so far on this thread have been jejune and perform gross violence on the evidence such as we have it..

Are you actually under the delusion that the Greek translation of the Hebrew Vorlage ("the LXX Septuaginta") back in 250 BCE was NOT approved by the Sanhedrin of Jerusalem for use by Greek speaking Diaspora Jews who could no longer speak or read Hebrew or Aramaic? Do you really think the LXX just sprouted up out of thin air from some splinter group?

You're going to have to understand that the LXX was not some random splinter group tossing off sloppy copies of the Torah, nor were the sons of Zadok ('Sadducees') any splinter group (despite what modern Rabbinic commentaries state) who represented mainstream normative priestly Judaeism since prior to the Macabbean revolt (c. 155 BCE)

Do you really discount the painstaking work of Emanuel Tov over the past 20 years (supported by Yohanon AP Goldman, Rolf Schaefer, Jan deWaard, Martin Abegg, Stephen Pisano, Peter Flint and Eugene Ulrich to name only a few scholars actively working on the Biblia Hebraica Quinta due to come out c. 2020CE) and decades of active research into the development of the protoMasoretic text including the Dead Sea Scroll versions of the Torah (inlcuding the ancient Samaritan Pentateuch) which demonstrate the immense fluidity of the text of the Torah prior to the 1st Failed Jewish War against Rome (66-72 CE) ?

You're also going to have to understand that prior to the advent of Ezra and his scribal school, there was no [recognisable] single Torah in existence (i.e. prior to c. 400 BCE) and that the texts we are examining are by and large conflated products from that time, rather than some monolithic document that has been 'unchanged' since the time of 'Mosheh'.

Are you seriously telling me you've never ever heard of the Documentary Hypothesis (e.g. JEPD) which has more than survived the test of time only to be re-confirmed with each new study by serious modern academics worldwide which basically prove that 'Mosheh' had little if anything to do with what we read in the Torah to-day?

Do yourself a favour and read Richard Elliott Friedman's introductory paperback (written for the layman) entitled "Who Wrote the Bible?'and also his 'Commentary on the Torah' which are highly readable backgrounders to these little matters for those who seem to walk around groping in the dark with regard to Mosaic authorship of the modern Torah.

Are you not aware of the many scribal errors which have crept into the Leningrad Codex (of 1008 CE) over time (NB: the protoMasoretic went through centuries of development), to say nothing of the numerous erasures and corrections numbering into the hundreds made to it by conflating it with the Aleppo Codex in 1006-1008 CE (which unfortunately is to-day missing the Torah sections since the destructive fire of late November 1947 - up to Deut 28:17).

As I asked before, where exactly IS this imaginary inerrant Torah you and Dashen dare to speak of? Can you produce it? The familiar Rabbinic Textus Receptus of most modern Torot is based soley on the Leninigrad Codex (which has a Karaite provenance) - Do you have in your possession something that modern biblical scholars don't have that lack the hundreds of scribal errors and misrepresentations we find throughout the Leningrad Codex itself when comparing its often corrected text with the Vorlagen of the Dead Sea Scrolls (in Caves 1-11) which are more than 1100 years older?

a reply to: Sigismundus

The reason there are almost no extant original versions of Torah scrolls is because The Assyrians Babylonians Greeks Romans Germans and many others burn them all to ashes Usually along with the Scribes.
The Leningrad codex was corrected against the Aleppo Codex.
Why would it need to be corrected if it was A legitimate representation?
What Emmanuel tov and you seem to be very unaware of are the vast amount of oral tradition
And laws pertaining to writing a Torah scroll.
The Talmud very specifically states that there must not be a letter missing or added.
the Septuagint as mentioned in the Talmud was commissioned by the ptolemys .
It was hailed as a true miracle because 70 of the leading rabbis of that time were forced to scribe Torah scrolls in separate rooms. When they all emerged all their Torah scrolls matched exactly except that they all made corrections to several words and phrases when translating into Greek.

a reply to: dashen

You wrote: QUOTE "The reason there are almost no extant original versions of Torah scrolls is because The Assyrians Babylonians Greeks Romans Germans and many others burn them all to ashes Usually along with the Scribes.
The Leningrad codex was corrected against the Aleppo Codex. Why would it need to be corrected if it was A legitimate representation? What Emmanuel tov and you seem to be very unaware of are the vast amount of oral tradition And laws pertaining to writing a Torah scroll. The Talmud very specifically states that there must not be a letter missing or added." UNQUOTE

Germans? When did the Germans attack Judaea, exactly? Also, you left out the Persians (i.e. after the Babylonians and before the Greeks in your list - you also left out the Parthians after the Greeks) - and it was the Persians who ruled Palestine for nearly 200 years beginning c. 530 BCE to 331 BCE bringing with them many ideas that influenced intertestamental Pharasaic Judaism and early Christianity, such as the Final Judgement, the Resurrection of the Dead and a belief in Angels and Daemons, etc.

We certainly see a Persian influence upon the Dead Sea Scroll Covenanters who (among other appellations) called themselves "sons of Zadok" (i.e. Zadukim or 'Sadducees') but shared many Persian influenced ideas along with the Pharasim who likewise had a belief in angels/daemons and the Resurrection of the Dead etc.

The idea of a single, pure, inerrant 'True Torah' handed down from the time of Moses to to-day is pure Rabbinic fantasy. FYI no one is here arguing about the stricter Talmudic halakha for copying scrolls post 100 CE - most of the scribes copied fairly scrupulously what they saw in front of them, especially after 200 CE when they started to count middle letters on a column of text for example.

However when we see ANY Torah text PRIOR to the 1st Failed Jewish War against Rome (66-72 CE) we find that no single, authoritative 'true Torah' exists, just several discrete families of MSS copies of Torah, some (like the proto-Masoretic) more-often copied than others.

The Torah of the Aleppo Codex of Ben Boyaa/Ben Asher (now missing everything before Deuteronomy 28:17) eventually became the de facto standard for all later generations of Torot for Rabbinic Jews down to the present day, supported by Moshe ben Maimon (=Maimonedes aka RaMBaM); and with a few exceptions (where it follows his contemporary rival, Ben Naphtali) the present Masoretic text is based on their life's work, although there are still some synagogues in the east who prefer Ben-Naphtali's recension.

As for the Aleppo Codex itself, it was originally of Karaite provenance (commissioned and paid for by Karaites and dedicated to the Karaite Community at Jerusalem - see the colophon of the Cairo Codex of the Prophets written by Moshe ben Asher) and continually revised and emended throughout the lifetime Shlomo Ben Boya’a c. 870 - c. 940 CE (often replacing 'plenum' consonant-vowel readings with 'defective' [i.e. shortened] ones). We are a long way from having a single unadulterated 'True Torah.'

Why do you insist that the Karaites were responsible for 'crappy copies' of the Torah, when they (of all people) would have tried to replicate the text that THEY received as punctiliously as possible (Qārāʾîm means 'Readers' [i.e. of the Scriptures] ). Interestingly, perhaps, that outside of obvious polemics we find cordial references between Karaites and Rabbanites in the 10th century CE.

Moreover no less an authority than Paul Kahle wrote (back in 1956) "We know with certainty that Moshe ben Asher and his son belonged to the community of Karaites and it is therefore very likely that also the other members of the Ben Asher family were [also] Karaites." ("The Masoretic Text of the Bible and the Pronunciation of Hebrew, JJS 7).

An off-hand reference to Ben Asher being a Karaite at a recent Conference brought an impassioned reaction from one audience member - and I've been seeing a lot of this lately, including this thread whenever I read people like yourself linking Karaites to some random 'splinter group' as opposed to the Karaites who at their heyday were representing majority/normative Judaism in the 10th and 11th centuries CE. I'm getting the distinct impression that a lot of people are starting to grasp the notion that something's 'not quite right' with the more conservative party line...

Hang on to your hats, since all this will start to dribble out to the general public as we approach 2020 with the long awaiting arrival of the Biblia Hebraica Quinta, where the divergences and provenance of the Textus Receptus will be on view for all to see up close and personal.

a reply to: Sigismundus

I didn't forget the Persians. The Persians were actually responsible for the rebuilding of the temple in Jerusalem.
The whole story of Purim is actually about the Jews rise to power in the Persian Empire.
Xerxes was likely Jewish.
I'd never said the Germans attacked Judea. I said they burned the scrolls and the scribes.
Your claim that the belief in angels was introduced at a later time is false on its face.
The Torah refers to angels several times.

Your so called rabbinik fantasy of a one true Torah is supported by the fact that the Torah is replete with references to the ceremony of Hakhel Where all the Jews would converge in Jerusalem and check the Nations Torah Scrolls against a master copy.
Also you have completely ignored the link I provided earlier that Talks about how many ancient Torah scrolls were only for reference and not The strictly scribed ones which were found in synagogues.

This thing is about kaarites is that they are the followers of a heretic who disregarded the oral traditions..
But the Torah is replete with statements which make your argument invalid.
It really is you who are living in a fantasy world.
where the torah says do as I commandedt you on the mountain you are saying the mountain and the man and the situation was an invention.
When the very first commandment of the Ten Commandments is it was I who took you out of Egypt you say there was no Egypt and no Egyptian slavery.
And furthermore you say that millions of people adopt an extremely strict religion with a totally invented and very specific history.
For what purpose pray tell?
for what purpose does the Torah come and tell people to make phylactaries?
And nowhere in the text tell them how to do it?
only the oral tradition comes and tells us how.
You also completely discount the provenance of the Torah
.
There is a very detailed list in Pirkei Avot.
Where do you imagine that that list was edited?
Was Joshua an invention? Was King David an invention? Was King Hezekiah an invention?.






Joshua received the Torah straight from Moses.
there is already archaeological evidence supporting the conquest of Joshua.
The ancient Torah scrolls that you keep mentioning are fragmentary at best.
There is no legible way to compare them to the modern text.
I have tried.
there is part of a verse here part of a verse there but no complete Pentateuch.
Your claims are based on heavy speculation and nearly no evidence.
And most importantly can you even read it in the original Hebrew?

a reply to: Sigismundus

See. What youre really saying is at some point in history a cabal of rabbis got together and invented a very precise and complucated history and set of laws and books, and apparently also planted Tons of archaeological evidence.

a reply to: Sigismundus

Oh and another thing.
you claim that there is only a pluriform version of the Torah, ande before a certain date there existed many versions.
and where do you in your imagination wonder those were copied from?
And those?
all these different books that match up nearly 99%
spring into existence spontaneously?

a reply to: Sigismundus

Also also additionally.
you and Mr Emmanuel tov seem to be completely ignorant as to why there are so many discrepancies in theKaarite scrolls.
because they have no oral tradition to go on, they write many words as they are read instead of how they are traditionally written.
so for instance there are dozens of times in a Torah scroll where the word "he" is written in the scroll, and the word"she" is read. The discrepancy in Hebrew would be the elongation of the small letter yod to the near identical letter vav.
Now this world alone accounts for nearly every discrepancy aside from poorly trained scribes

originally posted by: dashen
a reply to: AutisticEvo

The torah actually makes several startling predictions. Including future exiles abd redemptions.

You realize Moses was not the author as 'attributed to' the writing of the first five books of the old testament (genesis); no one knows the true author (certainly not Abraham).

a reply to: vethumanbeing

casting doubt is easy with no real proof.

a reply to: dashen

There's an old hacker movie called "Pi" (1999) that talks about this. A hacker breaks the Torah code, and two groups of people go after him, Wall Street execs, and the hasidics (Jewish mysticism).

a reply to: DebtSlave

Darren aronofsky. Know him. Good guy. His father was my science teacher. Wouldn't shut up about him.

originally posted by: dashen
a reply to: vethumanbeing

casting doubt is easy with no real proof.

Ask Moses himself; he was 'as attributed' (by the Catholic Living Bible of all works) to be the writer of Genesis (and no one else in future history has confirmed this as authentic). There is no doubt here at all.