It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Bible Code-New Evidence Overturns Skeptics' Case

page: 1

log in


posted on Jan, 21 2003 @ 11:28 PM
New Evidence Overturns Skeptics' Case
Explosive 1,400+ ELS Cluster
Dwarfs Skeptics' Counter-Example

Opponents of Bible codes say that you can find meaningful clusters in any book. To support their case, they presented an example of a code cluster about Hanukah they found in Tolstoy's War and Peace.

While this example was fairly comparable to clusters Bible code researchers had presented back then, our researchers have unearthed clusters that look like mountains compared to the molehill of the Hanukah example. In this report we present a detailed side-by-side comparison of the Hanukah example and the most extensive cluster researchers have located to date-- the explosive Isaiah 53 codes. In short, what skeptics told us three years ago is now completely out of date.

Click on a link below to continue:

posted on Jan, 22 2003 @ 02:29 PM
Skeptics say it's bunk because of the NEGATIVE codes in there, including things like "there is no Jesus" and "God is Dead" which can be found many times.

"There is no deliverance in Jesus/yeshua" and "Jesus is Satan" which can be found with a skip of 666:

None of Jesus' names are found in the codes:

If it was real and valid, it shouldn't say things that are untrue.

(well, they also say it's bunk because you can find all sorts of messages in all sorts of books. We could find intriguing things in my Macromedia Flash book, but I wouldn't say they were messages from deities.)

[Edited on 22-1-2003 by Byrd]

posted on Jan, 22 2003 @ 03:29 PM
I`ve read the bible code and have just picked up the second book but I have serious trouble with it.

When Drosnin shows a page of hebrew and then demonstrates where the code is, it looks like the code and the words, in english, it seems nothing more than a farce. In the first book he does n`t seem to do any real in depth analysis of the vercaity of the code yet expects us, without proper reference, to accept what he says. He says various teams of mathmeticians have checked and verified it to be true and although he shows a fairly concise version of his and Rips`s results there does n`t seem to be a proper agrument of others cases against this or a bibliography for checking other peoples results.

Skeptic to the war in 2006......oh yeah and the alien landing...and....jesus rebuilds my hotrod 2009.

I respect people opinions (well most of them anyway) on this site and would be interested to know what other people think about it.

Still with an open mind on a compelling work

[Edited on 22-1-2003 by cassini]


log in