I pose a challenge.

Try designing a Geneology, even from fiction, but is had to meet these requierments.
1. The number of words in it must be divisible by 7 EVENLY.
2. The number of letters must also be divisible by 7.
3. The number of vowels and constanants must be divisble by 7.
4. The number of words that begin with a vowel must be divisible by 7.
5. The number of words that behing with a constanant must be divisible by 7.
6. The number of words that occure more than once must be divisble by 7.
7. The number of words that occur in only one form shall be divisible by 7.
8. The number of words that occur in in more than one form shall be divisible by 7.
9. The number of nouns shall be divisible by 7.
10. Only 7 words shall NOT be nouns.
11. The numbers of NAMES in the geneology should be divisible by 7.
12. Only 7 other types of nouns are permitted.
13. The number of male names should be divisible by 7.
14. The number of generations should be 21, also divisible by 7.

Can you do it? Baring in mind Gods chosen number is 7.

If you came by this on your own would you assume that it was all random chance or part of an intricate design, like a signature?

This has been done, in the Greek, in the geneology of our saviour Jesus Christ, in the first 11 verses of the gospel of Matthew.

But the number of verses isn’t divisible by 7! Heretic!
a reply to: Joneselius

Just a question do those laws apply when it is written in another language?

The Kabbalah .....the mystic teachings from hell.

The book of Matthew Gosppel message concerning Jewish Geneology targets the Jewish Christians showing David's bloodline and the connection with the Messiah while the other books of the Gospel (Mark, Luke and John) targeted Gentiles.

Matthews Geneology only went back to King David's line while Luke's Geneology went back to Abraham (who was not a Jew).

a reply to: Joneselius

a reply to: DeathSlayer

Agreed both the Kabbalah and the Oral Torah are NOT from God.

The Kabbalah can be seen as much later human originated gnostic writings and heretical texts while the Oral Torah supposedly passed down since the time of Moses only appeared AFTER the exile in Babylon and is completely unknown to Ethiopian Jewish Rabbi for example as well as never once being referenced or referred to by any part of the Torah, the Torah being of course known to us as the old testament.

a reply to: DeathSlayer

This isn't Kabbala, I'm not using Gematria at all. I'm just pointing out the nature of seven...

Wow, people went full heretic hunting.....

a reply to: Joneselius

Which "God" are we talking about here?

There have been several thousand iterations throughout human history....

Also.. I pose you a challenge...

Prove that your "God" has a "chosen number", in fact, first of all, prove he actually exists in the first place?

And FYI, the bible, (Written by man, edited by man, published by man) is not proof...

PA

a reply to: PerfectAnomoly

You say without a hint of irony.

Do the challenge then....

a reply to: Joneselius

Wow, people went full heretic hunting.....

But ain't that a big part of of the Christian faith? The devil is always there seeking to covertly influence the minds and thoughts of the righteous to the degree that the faithful must always be vigilant, keeping a wary eye on all those around who might subvert the true interpretation of the gospel?

a reply to: Joneselius
I agree with perfect anomaly. Prove your God. My gods predate a Christian god. Does that make mine right or yours?

originally posted by: Joneselius
a reply to: DeathSlayer

This isn't Kabbala, I'm not using Gematria at all. I'm just pointing out the nature of seven...

Wow, people went full heretic hunting.....

You expected people to be rational and actually stick to the topic at hand?

Just wait until this thread gets canned because its Christian in nature. I'm about ready to bail on ATS just like I've bailed on Fascistbook and every other fascist controlled social media platform, given the mass influx of zombies and what looks to be some moderators' bent toward squashing things they don't like.

originally posted by: SwampFox999
a reply to: Joneselius
I agree with perfect anomaly. Prove your God. My gods predate a Christian god. Does that make mine right or yours?

As to "your god" predating the God of Jesus and of Abraham, nope. The God that Christianity follows was there when the first foundations of creation were laid. "In the beginning ..." He is the author of all creation. All other "gods"

For although there may be so-called gods in heaven or on earth—as indeed there are many “gods” and many “lords”— yet for us there is one God, the Father, from whom are all things and for whom we exist, and one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom are all things and through whom we exist. ~1 Corinthians 8:5-6

22 "I, wisdom, was with the Lord when he began his work, long before he made anything else. 23 I was created in the very beginning, even before the world began. 24 I was born before there were oceans, or springs overflowing with water, 25 before the hills were there, before the mountains were put in place. 26 God had not made the earth or fields, not even the first dust of the earth. 27 I was there when God put the skies in place, when he stretched the horizon over the oceans, 28 when he made the clouds above and put the deep underground springs in place. 29 I was there when he ordered the sea not to go beyond the borders he had set. I was there when he laid the earth's foundation. 30 I was like a child by his side. I was delighted every day, enjoying his presence all the time, 31 enjoying the whole world, and delighted with all its people. ~Proverbs 8:22-31

a reply to: PerfectAnomoly


“… in fact, first of all, prove he actually exists in the first place?”

LOL! The primary refrain used by self-satisfied Atheists everywhere. As smart as atheists think they are, they can’t see the inherent contradiction in that demand. They’re great at pointing out contradictions in the Christian Bible…but other contradictions go unnoticed.

Here’s a hint:

Faith begins where science ends. If Gods existence could be scientifically proven, He wouldn’t need faith. Off topic—I don’t know about you, but I need the people I love to have faith in me.

a reply to: Joneselius

It is pathetic, God can't deploy suitable algorithms to sign communications; either mortals can fake their signature or I am God.

1. The number of words are divisible by 7.
2. The number of letters are divisible by 7.
3. The number of vowels are divisible by 7.
4. The number of consonants are divisible by 7.
5. The number of words starting with a vowel are divisible by 7.
6. The number of words starting with a consonant are divisible by 7.
7. The number of words that occur more than once are divisible by 7.

The ability to write text following patterns is not proof of God, sorry

a reply to: Thoughtcrime

in some cases it is impossible to prove a negative, so the burden of proof primarily falls on the person trying to prove a positive. ideally both sides would share evidence supporting their views, instead of arguing over who needs to prove what first

originally posted by: ADEP3ZJH
a reply to: Joneselius

The ability to write text following patterns is not proof of God, sorry

I don't think that anybody said this constitutes "proof of God," only that it is a highly improbable occurrence, nearly impossible to happen by chance, and lends a level of interest and possibility of some other intervention to the text. Then there was the challenge to repeat the patter even with a fabricated geneology.

See, you tried - as do so many on this forum - to distract and diverge the discussion from what was intended. If you have something to say against the OP's original statement, take the challenge and do what he said probably can't be done. Butting in to refute your imaginary claims that were never made just makes you look pathetic, really.

originally posted by: ADEP3ZJH
a reply to: Thoughtcrime

in some cases it is impossible to prove a negative, so the burden of proof primarily falls on the person trying to prove a positive. ideally both sides would share evidence supporting their views, instead of arguing over who needs to prove what first

Mmm…okay. So where do I fall in this? Presumably, those who claim God doesn’t exist are the ones burdened with proving a negative; the fact that they cannot support their view through logic or science is telling. It does not fall on those with opposite views to prove anything…else they’d be arguing with themselves.

You might have misunderstood the thrust of my first post— that there are two worlds: one of science and one of Faith. My point was that the existence of God (or any god) falls outside the world of science, and therefore cannot be ‘proven’. You either believe or you don’t. I made NO argument as to who had to prove what first, simply that Gods existence cannot be proved by any current scientific means. In fact, it was PerfectAnamoly who challenged believer to prove God first.

a reply to: Thoughtcrime

it is nearly impossible to prove a negative such as "there is no god", but it is possible to prove a positive such as "there is a god"

you may have seen the collatz conjecture on youtube about a month ago, the conjecture could be proven false if a contradiction is found; currently no contradictions have been found and it has remained unproven. in the case of the collatz conjecture its difficult to prove it is always true, but proving it false requires no mathematical proof and only one contradiction; in a way this is similar to proving whether god exists, its difficult to prove god doesnt exist, but it would be relatively easy for god to prove he does exist

as for the burden of proof, i believe in this case it falls on those who believe in god since his existence can be proven but not concretely disproven, and that both sides should share information and think critically instead of playing team sports

a reply to: incoserv

i guess i did jump to conclusions, while searching for more information about this challenge i found a page with the following:

When professors on the mathematics faculty at Harvard University were presented with this biblical phenomenon they naturally attempted to disprove its significance as a proof of divine authorship. However, after valiant efforts these professors were unable to duplicate this incredible mathematical phenomenon. The Harvard scientists used the English language and artificially assigned numeric values to the English alphabet. They had a potential vocabulary of over 400,000 available English words to choose from to construct a sentence about any topic they chose. Compare this to the limitations of word choices in the biblical Hebrew language that has only forty-five hundred available word choices that the writers of the Old Testament could use. Despite their advanced mathematical abilities and access to computers the mathematicians were unable to come close to incorporating 30 mathematical multiples of 7 as found in the Hebrew words of Genesis 1:1.

i assumed OP was intending to use peoples failure to complete this challenge as evidence of "divine authorship", i didnt have the energy to complete the challenge for all 14 rules so i settled for the first 7:

It is pathetic, God can't deploy suitable algorithms to sign communications; either mortals can fake their signature or I am God.

if you could further explain OPs challenge i would be happy to take the full challenge, if i cannot do it then i might re-evaluate my current beliefs; if you could explain what designing a genealogy means and where i can find the first 11 verses of the gospel of Matthew that would be appreciated

Butting in to refute your imaginary claims that were never made just makes you look pathetic, really.

the choice of words in the text that follows the first 7 rules are a product of the method i was using to generate it, not aimed at anyone in this thread