RE: Call me a fideist

Glenn, has convinced me. "Pi in the Sky" must be an inspired text. And
why is the author's first name John? Ooh, Ooh ... Would you do my book
next? The first sentence is: "We humans stand at the pinnacle of God's
creation."

Now if you count the letters you get 40. That's the number of days that
Christ fasted in the wilderness and the number of days he was on earth
between the resurrection and assension. It's the same number of days it
rained on Noah's boat. I didn't plan that! It just happened! But that is
as far as I got. Hey, you and Vernon are all right. Keep those
calculators humming.

~Dick Fischer

> > You wrote:
> >
> > > Vernon, I would agree with you except that mathematically one can do
> > with
> > > any text whatsoever, what you do to the Bible. Such a watermark is
not
> > > really a watermark unless you can demonstrate that this can ONLY be
done
> > > for
> > > Scripture. Having seen it done with other texts, I know it isn't
> > unique.
> >
> >
> > Your words cause me to doubt that you have seriously considered the
> > evidence
> > I provide. Possibly you are confusing my approach with that of the
> > proponents of ELS (Equidistant Letter Sequences). I am aware that they
> > have
> > encountered problems of the kind you describe.
> >
> > http://www.nwcreation.net/wiki/index.php?title=The_Beginning_of_Wonders
> >
> > Vernon
>
> Let's look at your calculation of e from John 1:1. Why is the .0011% error
> considered ok? Why shouldn't God get it right rather than have this small
> error?
>
> You use one system for your numbering of letters. It isn't the most
natural.
> One could use alpha =1 and omega= 24 rather than alpha = 1 and omega= 800.
> Then your entire numerology would be different, but you would still find
> relationships of interest.
>
> I pulled a book at random from my library. It is Pi in the Sky by John D.
> Barrow. I opened to the Preface and used the first sentence. It is: There
> is safety in numbers. Assigning 1 to A and 26 to Z, and multiplying each
> letter by its corresponding value and adding them I get 275 for the value
of
> this sentence.
>
> Now, there is an amazing relationship in this first sentence which
predicts
> the exact exponent of Newton's law of gravitation. Given that there are
> five words, and the square of 5 is 25 (note that this is raising 5 to the
> power of 2 which is the exact exponent of Newton's law of gravitation).
> Dividing by 25 we find that the answer is 11. But, there are exactly 22
> letters in this 5 word sentence. And if you divide 22 by 11 you get
> 2--precisely the exponent in Newton's theory. And note how many times 2
> appears in this derivation. It appears 6 times. First there are 22
letters,
> then there is the power of 2. It appears once in the square of 5 (25) It
> appears once in 275. and it appears in the final answer---2. This of
> course is twice the number of the trinity.
>
> Now, if you add the numbers used in the above calculation you have
> 22+275+5+2+25+2= 331. This is the 67th prime. If you add the digits of
331
> you get 7, which is another prime. 67 itself is a prime--three primes to
> represent the trinity again. If you multiply 7*67*331 you get 155239.
What
> do you get if you add the digits of 155239 up? Why you get 25, the square
> of the number of words in the first sentence of Pi in the Sky.
>
> Now, if you look at the 7, 67, and 331 and you multiply them by pairs
>
> 7*67 = 469
> 7* 331 = 2317
> 67 * 331 = 22177
>
> Adding the digits of these 3 numbers yield the primes 19, 13, 19
> respectively. These numbers yield 2 different primes--precisely the
> exponent in Newton's theory of gravity.
>
> If you take 22177-2317-469 you get 19391. Adding the digits of this
number
> gives 23. Adding the digits of 23, yields 5, the number of words in
Barrows
> sentence. Notice that we added two times--precisely the exponent number
in
> Newton's theory of gravitation.
>
> Multiplying 19*13 gives 247 which if the digits are added gives 13. This
is
> another clue. 1+3=4 and 4 is the square of the exact number used in
Newton's
> theory of gravitation as the exponent. To get the square of 2 you have to
> use two 2's, which is what you need to describe the number of letters in
> Barrow's first sentence. And 3-1 = 2, the exact exponent of Newton's
> theory of gravitation.
>
> If you add the digits in both 19 and 13 you get 14 which if you then add
> those digits you get 5. Note that we iterated the addition twice, meaning
> the factor of 2 appears here which appears as the exponent in Newton's
> theory of gravity.
>
> Adding 19+13 you get 32 which if the digits are added, you get the number
of
> words in Barrow's sentence. Once again iterating the addition twice
yields a
> significant number.
>
> How could Barrow have known that he was writing such a fabulous sentence
> with such a clear message encoded in it? Clearly this is a deeply inspired
> (not to mention inspiring) book. God clearly has some special plan for
the
> writer John D. Barrow.
>
> Vernon, this is why I don't believe what you do about mathematically
encoded
> messages in Genesis 1.
Received on Mon May 30 22:16:02 2005