From: richard@biblewheel.com
Date: Mon Nov 03 2003 - 02:31:39 EST
Walt wrote:
> I think, Richard, that you miss the reason why many
> people like me are not interested. Let me state it and
> see if you can tell me why I am wrong.
Hi Walt,
Thanks for you insights. They are very valuable, but I see a number of
problems with the reasons you gave. First, there seems to be a fundamental
inconsistency in your point of view. It leapt out to me immediately because
I have seen it many times. Here is what I mean. You started out by
suggesting that the numerical phenomena and the Bible Wheel are REAL and
then said "Now what?" and went on to assert that it was a "toy" that "added
nothing to Christianity."
If the numerical phenomena and the Bible Wheel really exist in what you
admit to be "inspired writings", then how can you deny that God put them
there? And if you admit that God put them there, then how could you then say
that they are "toys" that "add nothing to Christianity"? I think you need to
asked God, not Vernon nor me, why He put them there. All Vernon and I did
was discovery them. I think it is inconsistent to 1) admit Scripture is
inspired, and 2) admit its numerical structure is real, and then 3) suggest
the latter to be nothing but a "toy." Forgive me, but your response also
seems to lack Christian imagination and a proper historical perspective. I
get the impression you answered without actually thinking much about the
issue or reading any of the pages I cited. Forgive me if I am wrong, and
please take no offence. I greatly value your effort to answer me.
Another problem is that you have restricted the conversation to mere
numerical relations. This is not at all correct. The patterns are fully
integrated with all levels of meaning; its not just numerical. For example,
there is the integration of the numerical structures with the plain text of
Scripture, e.g. the reiterative prime hexagon/star pairs 19/37 and 37/73
that generate the structure of Genesis 1.1 integrate with the plain text
where God repeatedly associates the Work of Creation with the Number 6.
Exegesis relating the Number 6 to Creation goes back to the early church
(e.g. Clement of Alexandria). This also integrates with the nature of
reality via hexagonal space filling structures, the hexagonal Chi-Rho, 3D
axes, etc. Another example is seen in my work on the large-scale structure
of Scripture in the form of the Wheel which has nothing to do with numerical
relations per se. Any child can recognize the significance of the simple
Circle as the ideal symbol of things divine, eternal, and perfect. Perhaps
you could explain to me how it is possible to dismiss the beautiful and
endless ramifications of the tri-radiant cruciform halo formed by the
sevenfold symmetric perfection of the Bible Wheel? To call this a "mere
coincidence" is to rob language of all meaning. Oddly enough, its the only
answer I have yet received from people who deny the significance of my work.
It seems to me (IMHO) that you really did not mean to say that the patterns
are real, because if they are really REAL, then there can be no doubt that
they surpass the greatest discoveries in the history of the world.
Finally, to suggest that non-believers would confuse this with "Kooky
Christian stuff" because "People are always managing to find patterns in the
midst of chaos" is an EXTREME stretch. I did nothing ... let me repeat ..
NOTHING to force fit the sevenfold symmetric perfection of the Bible Wheel.
The truth is that I studied the basic Bible Wheel for FIVE years before one
day thinking to myself, "Hey! The first Spoke is composed of the first book
of the Law (Genesis), the first book of the Prophets (Isaiah), and the first
book of the NT Epistles (Romans)! That's interesting." By the end of the
day, I had the Canon Wheel in my hand. I was utterly struck dumb with
amazement. I sat in awe for three days just looking at it. It was the purest
moment of scientific discovery mingled with religious ecstasy. I had been
studying the Wheel for five years, and I suddenly and effortlessly
DISCOVERED a large-scale symmetric structure in the Holy Bible never before
seen in the history of the world! Sealed with the Aleph and Tav! There was
no looking for patterns in chaos, Walt. It didn't happen that way. It is the
Work of God.
Thanks again for the intelligent and respectful feedback. It is greatly
appreciated. I hope the conversation continues.
Richard
Discover the sevenfold symmetric perfection of the Holy Bible at
http://www.BibleWheel.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "Walter Hicks" <wallyshoes@mindspring.com>
To: <richard@biblewheel.com>
Cc: <asa@calvin.edu>
Sent: Sunday, November 02, 2003 7:31 PM
Subject: Re: The Iota Subscript
>
>
> richard@biblewheel.com wrote:
>
> > One reason people reject the study of the alphanumeric structure of
> > Scripture is because of a perceived arbitrariness in methodology and
> > interpretation. Some people seem to think it verges on the occult, and
take
> > it as the polar opposite to the cherished scientific method.
>
> I think, Richard, that you miss the reason why many people like me are not
> interested. Let me state it and see if you can tell me why I am wrong.
>
> Lets us say that everything that you and Vernon see is really there. I
think
> that it is great that you have discovered it. Now what?
>
> I, and others, already accept the scriptures as inspired writings. Having
> imbedded numerical codes adds nothing to it for me. I'm sure that certain
people
> who have a deep interest in mathematical structures would get greatly
excited
> about it . However, it adds nothing to Christianity. It is a toy for those
who
> are so inclined.
>
> At the other extreme, nonbelievers are likely to think that this is more
Kooky
> Christian stuff. People are always managing to find patterns in the midst
of
> chaos. A skeptical mind will not even want to look. I don't want to spend
the
> time and nonbelievers certainly will not. So what then is the point?
>
> Conclusion: You and vernon want everybody to look and see this wonderful
> discovery. However, there only so many hours in a day and it seems like a
waste
> of time to me.
>
> I really do not want to belittle those ideas, but what am I failing to see
about
> the notion? I mean the basic notion of finding mathematical codes, not
your
> specific results..
>
> Walt
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> ===================================
> Walt Hicks <wallyshoes@mindspring.com>
>
> In any consistent theory, there must
> exist true but not provable statements.
> (Godel's Theorem)
>
> You can only find the truth with logic
> If you have already found the truth
> without it. (G.K. Chesterton)
> ===================================
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Mon Nov 03 2003 - 02:30:06 EST