Y2K encoded in the Bible?

greenspun.com : LUSENET : TimeBomb 2000 (Y2000) : One Thread

During the past year, the idea that encoded words and phrases exist within the Hebrew text of the Torah (the first five books of the Bible) has been advanced by Michael Drosnin's best-selling book, "The Bible Code." Although respected Israeli mathematicians have been diligently researching (and substantiating) this idea since the '80's, "The Bible Code" brought the existence of the codes into full view of the public.

Having heard of the Bible codes from a friend almost a year ago, I became intrigued with them. I have since purchased two different Bible code search programs and acquired a working knowledge of Hebrew in order to verify their existence for myself. In like manner, when I became aware of the Y2K problem (coincidentally, at about the same time), I started researching the extent of the problem personally. Late last year I became convinced that Y2K was going to be a significant event.

After coming to that conclusion, I decided to combine my two areas of study to see if any reference to Y2K and the so-called "Millennium Bug" could be found in the Torah. What I found surprised and shocked me. Within a small 22 verse segment of the book of Numbers (Num. 7:53-7:75), I found numerous key words and phrases relating to Y2K. A graphic of my research results can be found at:

http://www.aristotle.net/~bhuie/code2r.htm

I am not a statistician, so I cannot tell you how likely it is that all these related words just happened by chance to appear encoded so close together in this text. I know many of you out there will scoff at this; I can understand and identify with that reaction, since I've experienced it myself with both these topics. However, for those of you with an open mind, I would encourage you do some research on the Bible codes (also called the Torah codes) and formulate an opinion based on fact. Dr. Jeffery Satinover recently released a very scholarly and impressive work entitled "Cracking the Bible Code." For anyone wishing to seriously examine this phenomenon, I would recommend it highly. If this code finding is valid, it is a wake-up call to those who have an ear to hear.

-- Bryan Huie (bhuie@aristotle.net), April 08, 1998

Answers

Again I will have to put my foot down and point out "If people are to take the Y2K problem seriously, we shouldn't be debating these superstitious flights of fancy on this forum." An acquiantance recently pointed out to me that the internets "www" is in fact the hebrew translation for 666! Which puts you in league with every paranoids favorite scapegoat-BEELZEBUB!(next to the U.N. of course)just for the simple reason of using the computer. Looks like Michael Drosnin is laughing all the way to the bank. Looks like another thread to dispose of Ed!

-- Jean Randall (ZAMSIMBA@aol.com), April 09, 1998.

I normally do not get involved in religious discussions and to be honest, this really isn't one. Bryan just brought to our attention an interesting idea. No where does he claim that this is truth, he just says "Check it out." This is the same thing I tell people about Y2K and give them sources to do this. He does not deserve to be blasted for this. I think he presented the topic in a way so as NOT to offend anyone. (I am usually one of the first to be turned off by a religious arguement.)

My major in college was mathematics and so it has been of interest to me to look at the Bible Codes. I am not a statistician either, but the codes rank above coincidence in my book. Of course, the other problem and this is clearly stated by the gentleman that wrote the book "The Bible Codes" is that it is easy to find references after the fact, but difficult to use to predict.

I join with Bryan in saying "Check it out". To me it is just an interesting side note to Y2K NOT a religious arguement.

-- Rebecca Kutcher (kutcher@pionet.net), April 09, 1998.


I was intrigued by these codes until I read the article on this website. Mr. Drosnin is not endorsed by many Hebrew scholars some of them do not like what he is doing with the codes. Seems you can do quite a bit with the right filtering with these code programs. See the 'Bible Codes, or Matrix of Deception' article on the website below.

SCP

-- Paul Powell (PaulPowell@Hotmail.com), April 09, 1998.


This thread is definetly of a religious nature. Call it subtle persuation. If the book can somehow persuade you that based on some mathematical formulations- that the bible has to be taken as the truth, then we're just giving someone a pulpit to express his religious convicitions. Quite frankly, I can't see the logic in trying to find hidden messeges of enlightenment in a book that states that God creates day and night on the first day but somehow waits until day number four to create the sun and all the other stars.-Genesis 1:3-5, 16-19

-- Jean Randall (ZAMSIMBA@aol.com), April 09, 1998.

I think it is time for a little tolerance for people expressing their worldviews. Everyone believes things differently, even about the affects of Y2k. You can't expect people to seperate religion from their lives on regard to this issue, even if your religion is humanism, athiesm, etc. All of the posts I've read here have been VERY mild and posted with non-inflammatory intentions. I for one want to hear views from EVERYONE, no matter if they may seem a bit kooky to some. We still have freedom of speech and religion. If I find something offensive I just don't read that person's posts in the future.

-- Jo (joloo@bigfoot.com), April 10, 1998.


Well, with the risk of not having "Y2K" taken seriously-let the kookyness begin! Hey flat earthers and pre-tribulationists, we havn't heard your views yet!

-- Jean Randall (ZAMSIMBA@aol.com), April 10, 1998.

This thread has caused some significant disagreement, as well as a few private email messages to me, asking me to delete the thread. I considered doing so, but have decided to leave it in place for a very simple reason: it's very easy to ignore the postings if you don't like them.

Personally, I would prefer not to get religion involved in the discussion of Y2K; and it's unlikely that I'll respond to any of the postings on this thread. However, I find it useful to read the postings from time to time, simply because it reminds me that some people ARE interested and concerned about the religious "connection" to Y2K. To ignore this is just as unrealistic as it is to ignore the fact that some people sincerely believe that Y2K will be used by government as an excuse/opportunity to impose martial law. It seems to me that you can't carry on a rational discussion with someone unless you have some idea of where they're coming from, and what assumptions they're making -- whether you agree with those assumptions or not.

So the thread stands, and I invite those who wish to continue the discussion of whether Y2K is encoded in the Bible to do so...

Ed

-- Ed Yourdon (yourdon@worldnet.att.net), April 12, 1998.


Jean,

I recommend Satinover's book very highly, Drosnin's book, IMHO, is prattle. As the mathmaticians involved in the research will quickly point out, the issue is most definately NOT the messages, you can find all sorts of coincidental word groupings in any large work, and without statistical expertise and a priori search parameters, all findings are meaningless. There is only one issue regarding the code that is relevant, and that is its existence. It does exist, the original research was published in Statistical Science after an unprecedented THREE peer reviews and five years of mandated reworking by those peers. There was a very large bias against this work, hence the 3 reviews. At the end of the day, the mathematics stood, and Statistical Science published the research. As an aside, modern cosmology shows that at a tiny fraction of a second after the big bang, the overall energy level of the universe dropped below a crucial threshold, and energy became separated from matter. This phenomenon is known as 'quark confinement'. At that time, light was forever separated from matter. So, interestingly enough, light and dark did in fact exist prior to the formation of the sun and stars.

Jay

-- Jay Elliott (drj@myriad.net), April 13, 1998.


Jay, was that bit of astronomy from a creationists guide to the cosmos put out by the 'Creation Research Society'?(A group of scientists with creationists leanings) If you read genesis you will see that god created the heavens and the earth first. It also mentions the spirit of god hovering over the waters prior to god saying "let there be light." Thus, the earth being of stable matter- would have been converted back to energy if one were to use your Big bang time line. Also, one can find or manufacture coincidence for anything. Take for example the playing of Pink Floyds "Dark side of the moon" CD to the movie "Wizard of Oz"(start cd after the second roar of the MGM lion and turn down the movie volume) Its loaded with coincidences but I wouldnt start a religious movement over it! I will finish my rant with a lesson from the bible. "God forbids cross-dressing."-Deuteronomy 22:5 Noah is 500 years old when he fathers his first child.-Genesis 5:32

-- Jean Randall (ZAMSIMBA@aol.com), April 14, 1998.

Jean, never heard of the group you mention. That bit of info came from "Wrinkles in Time" by George Smoot and Keay Davidson. And anyway, it was not the point of the post, or this thread. I chimed in because the hard, cold scientific reality is that a group of very competent mathmaticians have found a code in Genesis. The most conservative p value for their research was < 0.000016. In our world today, research is routinely published and accepted with a p < 0.05 and a value less than 0.001 is generally considered the ( forgive me ;^)) Holy Grail of verification that the experimental results are not due to random occurrence. Arguing against the science because the outer text appears inconsistent or illogical is pointless. How readily these results are accepted certainly depends in large part on whether or not one wants to believe them, but either way, the science stands. The code exists.

-- Jay Elliott (drj@myriad.net), April 14, 1998.


For a chilling and detailed Biblical prophesy regarding year 2000 and the collapse of the infrastructure, I urge you to read the 24 brief verses which comprise the 18th Chapter of The Revelation in your New Testament. All comments welcome.

-- CCross (InnerDivinity@webtv.net), April 15, 1998.

CCRoss, I read those verses and did not see a clue about the year 2000. Would you care to explain? Thanks.

-- Gail (gmt@students.wisc.edu), April 15, 1998.

Jean Randall...give it a rest eh?, If you don't like what you read here, move on to one of the other subjects. You seem to have a real phobia of anything religious. Get a grip!!!

-- Steve Hart (Sierra@comptec.com), April 15, 1998.

Steve, are you Canadian per chance? No, I do not have a phobia about religion. In fact I find the study of the subject rather entertaining! But what we are risking here is opening the forum up to subjects like: Will the four horsemen of the apocalypse appear when Y2K hits?(I've seen this one on Gary North's site) or 'Don't bother about preparation because Jesus will provide for all your needs.' What do you think a person- trying to gauge the seriousness of Y2K for the first time; what are his thoughts going to be when he runs across stuff like that? Try:"I cant believe this nonsense about the end of the world or any of this other stuff associated with it!" I will now end my rant with another selection from the good book. "Whoever comes to me and does not hate father and mother, wife and children, brothers and sisters...cannot be my disciple."-Luke 14:26 "Whoever curses father or mother shall be put to death."-Exodus 21:17 God forbids tattoos.-Leviticus 19:28 God tells Moses that Aaron and his sons must always wear underwear when they enter God's tent or else they will be killed.-Exodus 28:42-43

-- Jean Randall (ZAMSIMBA@aol.com), April 16, 1998.

In response to the Bible codes I submit the following: http://cs.anu.edu.au/~bdm/dilugim/moby.html or as it's titled: "Assassinations Foretold in Moby Dick!"

-- Phil Adcock (padcock@lads.com), April 17, 1998.


A most excellent web site to check out Phil! Highly Recommended**** The bible question of the day: "Did Noah really bring on board Two of each of the different 2,500 species of Termites that have been found thus far?"

-- Jean Randall (ZAMSIMBA@aol.com), April 17, 1998.

Phil, As the researchers ( read real scientists ) point out clearly, predictions based upon the Equidistant Letter Sequenced Code are * impossible *. In fact, they are very concerned, because the numerous attempts to do so obscure the reality of the code's existance. Rational people will throw the baby out with the bathwater. Jean, your constant attempt to refute the code ( plaintext ) by pointing out the logical flaws in the written work ( ciphertext) is boring. There is a huge amount of "cognitive dissonance' baggage associated with this topic, certainly. What is also obvious is given the choice between defending our cherished opinions and allowing new information into our personal paradigm that forces a revision of said opinions, most of us immediately begin working on our defense. I again urge anyone interested in learning a tremendous amount about the science of cryptography and the SCIENTIFIC BASIS for the claim of a code in Genesis to read Satinover's book, " Cracking the Bible Code", it truly is a fascinating read. Of particular interest to me was the history of cryptography as it pertains to the outcome of WWII and modern computer science. The history of governmental use of cryptography in the Middle Ages was also enlightening.

-- Jay Elliott (drj@myriad.net), April 19, 1998.

REAL SCIENTISTS? ha ha ha....Hey Jay, and I'm the Queen of Spain! Its amazing how far a creationist would go to prove a point!

-- Jean Randall (ZAMSIMBA@aol.com), April 20, 1998.

This is a quote from a real scientist regarding the Code. " The phenomenon is real; what it means is up to the individual", David Kazhdan, chairman of the Department of Mathematics, Harvard University.

-- Jay Elliott (drj@myriad.net), April 20, 1998.

The following is directed to Jean Randal:

Your refusal to consider what may be valid information is similar to the flat-worlders or the earth-is-the-center-of-the-universers. Why don't you examine the question. Read the suggested book. THEN, voice your opinion. I, for one, am getting tired of your whining.

-- George Valentine (georgevalentine@usa.net), April 20, 1998.


If you don't like it....skip the forum. No one ever wins while debating religion! Grin and bear it! A lot of people think Y2K is a joke also.

-- Gail (gmt@students.wisc.edu), April 20, 1998.

Boy, you people love to argue. And not constructively.

Non-constructive argument inevitably takes away from the effort to educate the world about the Y2K threat, IMHO. Take all that argumentative energy and write your mayor, your county commissioner, your local utilities boss, your local newspaper editor, your local television station news director, your senator and congressman about this issue!

Maybe God in His infinite wisdom put info about Y2K in the Bible; maybe He didn't. I sincerely hope that He did, and that we can understand something more about it due to His forewarnings, because right now we just don't know what might happen. But whether He did or didn't, all this quibbling and personal attack about the subject is worthy of nothing but the landfill.

Let people have their opinions! (It's a constitutionally guaranteed right, lest we forget -- )

-- John Howard (pcdir@prodigy.net), September 10, 1998.


Can't tell, guess that's advantage of being a Roman Catholic - the Book is treated as a tool, divinely inspired to teach, guide, and confirm faith.

That's the crux of the problem: faith, by definition can't be logically argued becuase it is fundemental to the inner structure of who a person is, and therefore, how that person will respond. Please, to all, live, learn, and comment from others, don't condemn, and don't preach.

Reference and neotiation is okay though, I do recall several sessions of intense arguements about Sodom and Gormaugh, penalties for unwise kings, etc. between thelocal prophets and their God.

By the way, I think the Book got its timeline off a little, maybe because they hadn't invented logarithims yet. Isn't it interesting that a bunch of wandering Jewish shepards predicted the big bang theory, formation of the solar system and planets, the lands and oceans, continental drift, evolution (birds were created after dinosaurs, after all, in Genisis), the other mammals, and then man.

Note: that also indicates women were created after men. Hmmmn. Does that imply they are a higher form of life?

8<))

-- Robert A. Cook, P.E. (cook.r@csaatl.com), September 10, 1998.


Robert Cook, thanks for a chuckle. (^_^) Good point, about women being the higher form --

What one preacher (my great-uncle) said a long time ago, is that Woman was taken from the rib of the Man, and that means --

She is meant to be his equal, stand at his side.

If she was meant to be above man, she would have been taken from his head; if she was meant to be below him, she would have been taken from his foot.

That may be second-guessing God, but it sounds good to me.

-- John Howard (pcdir@prodigy.net), September 11, 1998.


Thank you, Ed Yourdon, for being so unbiased! Bryan, and anyone else curious enough to pursue this subject, get the book, Jesus Christ - The Number of His Name, by Bonnie Hurst. She uses the numerical equivalent of both the Hebrew and Greek alphabets and has come up with remarkable information...great affirmation for Christians!

-- Holly Allen (Holly3325@juno.com), September 11, 1998.

Could it be, Nostradamus used the Bible Code when he developed an opinion that life would be forever changed upon the turn of the millenium.

-- Bob Oserin (bobo@paloverde.com), September 17, 1998.

Like,duh!! OF COURSE y2k is in the Bible!! In Matthew, chapter 24,verse 37-41: As it was in the days of Noah, so it will be at the coming of the Son of Man. For in the days before the flood, people were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, up to the day Noah entered the ark; and they knew nothing about what would happen until the flood came and took them all away. That is how it will be at the coming of the Son of Man. Two men will be in the field; one will be taken, and the other left. Two women WILL BE GRINDING GRAIN WITH A HANDMILL; one will be taken and the other left!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! THAT WAS A JOKE,O.K.??????? Not the Bible, I mean, but how I used it for a brief moment of cheap humor! I mean you guys DO have a sense of humor still, right?

-- madeline (runner@bclp.net), September 23, 1998.

I'm sceptical of conventional things and of non-conventional things and especially of religious things, but one day for a laugh i looked into the bible codes thang and found the best of the pro-code arguments to be strong. This suprised me a hell of a lot, and i still have no idea what it all might mean. Certainly didn't convert me to Judaism but it left me a'wunderin. And NO we shouldn't be discussing this in a y2k forum because we're treading a tightrope as it is when it comes to convincing sane and rational people that y2k is so significant. If we give them an excuse to think we're all nuts then that might cost people dearly. True, we cant do peoples' thinking for them but I've found that when discussing one controversial issue (which I do often, eg ufos, conspiracies govt and otherwise, alternative health, unconventional history, wierd science, non-standard political philosophies, psychedelics,) it is best not to bring up other controversial issues even if they are related and even if they are worthy of attention. Shalom.

-- Beelzebozo (elbarto@thailand.com), September 28, 1998.

This "Bible code" thing is very interesting. I haven't looked into it much and don't have time to, but one question has occurred to me.

If this theory were true, wouldn't that mean that all of history is encoded there and that there is nothing we can do about it? Fate, destiny, etc.???

-- Buddy Y. (buddy@bellatlantic.net), September 28, 1998.


I do not object to this thread being here. At the same time I have no doubt that it seriously undermines the credibility of this site as a source of reasoned, informed Y2K information. The bible code has, in my opinion, been thououghly discredited. One can find similar messages in any work of sufficient length, for example, Moby Dick. See Asassinations predicted in Moby Dick! for an example. The bible code, like most forms of prognostication, has an excellent record of accurately predicting past events. It just doesn't do to well on the future.

-- Ned (entaylor@cloudnet.com), September 28, 1998.

Actually, it has not yet been discredited in a peer-reviewed scientific journal like Statistical Science, the journal where the original Torah Codes article was published. The Moby Dick study has not been examined for statistical accuracy the way the original paper was. Mathematicians from Harvard (including the chair of their department), Yale and Columbia have all validated the mathematics in the original study.

For the record, I don't know whether it is true or not, but I do know two things:

1) no one on either side has suggested that the codes, if they are real, could be used to predict something like Y2K. In fact, those arguing for the existence of the codes state explicitly that the codes cannot be used to predict the future in any way, shape or form. Hence, I don't think this thread really belongs in a Y2K forum (although I do find the topic interesting).

2)Those who cling to the scientific method as the sole arbiter of what is real and what is not real are as guilty of religious fanaticism as any cultist, monk, or Heaven's Gater. Prior beliefs that deny even the possibility of the codes being real are utterly antithetical to the spirit of free inquiry. Atheism is a religion just like any other.

scott

-- Scott Johnson (scojo@yahoo.com), October 02, 1998.


G-d is clear in His Word that we are not to use fortune telling or any prediction of the future. The Bible Codes are NEVER to be used to predict any future event, only confirm the past.

And one can use any other text in the world and one will never find the same results as with the Bible Codes, as I have tried.

It really looks as if G-d told us about the future thousands of years ago. Some may not like, some may not understand, but that's the way it is.

-- Vernon Hale (create@premiernet.net), January 03, 1999.


Where specifically does the Bible say not to make any predictions of the future? Can you please post the verses?

-- Rick (doc_u_ment@hotmail.com), March 08, 1999.

Moderation questions? read the FAQ