reply to post by SickeningTruths
The best and most scientific site I know is
Drosnin is . . . welll . . . charitably . . . largely a farce . . . though he popularized the topic.
His "codes" are too short to be attributable to more than chance.
The current state of the art and the science is that a code needs to be 30 characters/letters long, or more, to be statistically significant beyond
chance. Drosnin's stuff is much shorter.
Shorter stuff can be found in any long text.
The two mathemetician debunkers were caught essentially lying. They are worse farces than Drosnin. They have been proven emphatically wrong to the
point of it's absurd to give them a microgram of credibility.
The ISAIAH codes documented on the biblecodedigest site are emphatically and extremely beyond chance so far it's mind boggling to even conceptualize
how far beyond chance it is.
I think the Biblecodedigest folks are wise and accurate to be wary . . . even negative about
Bible codes as prophecy.
1. Even many of the surface text prophecies in the Bible are very cryptic and became clear only after they happened. For example: For centuries,
Jewish scholars had no answer for why there seemed to be two different Messiahs yet which were clearly one. One the Messiah comes as a suffering
servant. Then He comes as a conquering King. Now we see more clearly, how accurate the suffering servant prophecies were.
2. The Bible Codes are also usually mystifyingly cryptic or puzzling in their wording. After the fact, they become clear.
3. The Codes can be from VARIOUS PERSPECTIVES--even satan's or an evil ruler's. Expecting a lying ruler or satan to speak truth in a prophecy would
be fool hardy. And, it's not always clear what perspective the Code is 'speaking from.'
Therefore, it's exceedingly hazardous if not utterly foolish to use the Codes as any remotely dependable prophetic source.
I do slightly disagree with the BCD folks. I think there may be some prophetic codes arise in the future which will be clearer and fulfilled to the
letter clearly. But that's just my opinion.
I believe that the codes as science and art are still evolving . . . in the sense that experts are learning more and more what works in terms of
statistical analysis and what doesn't.
There are also some codes which individually do not reach the level of statistical significance beyond chance--yet which are clustered together in
maybe a dozen or more smaller, shorter codes around a verse in the surface text which has the same or similar keywords. This does not happen in
nonBiblical sources. I don't think they've yet devised a solid way to calculate the statistics that pleases everyone. Yet, SOMETHING is clearly
going on with those codes.
It's a fascinating subject.
Christ's Deity and life etc. are affirmed very explicitly in the codes. So are many other prophetic statements in Scripture regarding END TIMES
IIRC, Some agnostic Jewish scholars have become Christians because of the codes.
Folks who truly have a heart to know the truth could profit from a thoughtful and fair-minded exploration of the best science involved.
There's a lot of flakier junk that goes under the general title "Bible Codes" but which does not come close to statistical significance. It is
blather on the order of Drosnin's junk by folks who don't seem to understand much about the math involved. They come up with cutesy garbage and
pontificate at length as though they'd found something when they have found nothing.
I personally believe the codes may have something to do with the Scripture about Daniel being told to seal up the book, that it was for the time of
the end. Maybe not--that could well be a different thing entirely.
However, it is the END TIMES and only with the advent of the computer has Bible Code analysis become truly practical.
Isaac Newton believed there were Bible Codes and IIRC, he experimented somewhat in the direction of what we have now. He spent more time studying the
Bible than he did his scientific studies. He had his priorities right.
I believe the codes are a way of God documenting, affirming, proving that The Bible is essentially accurate in what He wanted to convey to man in the
centuries of its existence.