Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Diogenes the Cynic · 08-20-2006, 09:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Carin Nel

Not true. The ancient constellations are mentioned by God in His word, perfect in number and significance. They are hardly "artificial constructs of human imagination", but are God's own idea and handiwork.
Regards
Carin Nel

No, they're mentioned by people in ancient times who constructed them from their own imaginations and wrote about them. The Bible was written by people.

Carin Nel · 08-20-2006, 12:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Diogenes the Cynic

No, they're mentioned by people in ancient times who constructed them from their own imaginations and wrote about them. The Bible was written by people.

True, but with Divine inspiration. If you read my post above, you would recognise that God was the inspiration behind the writers as well as the Creator of the universe. Just read the post!
Regards
Carin Nel

Solo · 08-20-2006, 12:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Carin Nel

By "we" I refer to us humans.

You said that "we", meaning humans, do not study Scripture's numbers seriously. You do include yourself as a member of human race, I presume.

Quote:

It is a very difficult task to explain it in short. I don't know how long my answer may be according to the rules of this forum.
I'll try!

I believe you find it difficult to explain things in short. I am not so sure it has to do with the rules of this forum.

Quote:

There is design shown in the works (universe), as well as the Word of God (The Scriptures / Bible).
There can be neither works nor words without number.

Interesting.

Quote:

We can understand how man can act and speak without design or significance, but we cannot imagine that the great and infinite Creator and Redeemer could either work or speak without both His words or His works being absolutely perfect in every particular.

Assuming that the "we" in the sentence above again refers to "humans" generally, let me ask you this: Are you aware that the great majority of the posters on this forum vehemently denies the very thing you assert - i.e. the inerrancy of the Scripture ?

If the answer is yes, then they obviously can imagine, "His words and His works" as NOT "absolutely perfect in every particular".

Quote:

“As for God His way is perfect” (Ps.xviii. 30).
“The Law of the Lord is perfect” (Ps. xix. 7). They are both perfect in power, perfect in holiness and righteousness, perfect in design, perfect in execution, perfect in their object and end, and perfect in number.
All His works were (and are) done, and all His words were spoken and written, in the right way, at the right time, in the right order, and in the right number. “He tells the number of the stars” (Ps. cxlvii. 4). He “brings out their host by number” (Isa. Xl. 26). “He weighs the water by measure” (Job xxviii. 25).

These are declarations of faith, and as such they are fine.

Quote:

In all the works of God we find not only what we call “Law”, and a Law-maker, but we observe a Law enforcer. It simply means “God in action”; God not merely giving or making laws, but carrying them out and enforcing them.

I understand that the idea of separation of powers is a concept extremely difficult to grasp for a religious fundamentalist.

Quote:

As He is perfect, so His works and His Words also must be perfect.

But you already quoted Psalm 18:30 which simply declares God's way "perfect" without the causal link. Why can I not believe, if I wished, that it is the other way round: because God's ways are perfect, he is likely perfect also ?

Quote:

When we see number used not by chance, but by design; not at haphazard, but with significance; then we see not merely so many works and words, but the Living God working and speaking.

...and what happens when "we" see a number is used by a social custom, and as such by itself "without significance" ?

Quote:

When we see the same design in the works of God (the Creation) as well as in His Word (the Bible); the same laws at work; the same mysterious principles being carried out in each, the conviction is overwhelming that we have the same great Designer, the same Author; and we see the same Hand, the same seal stamped on all His works, and the same signature or autograph which may be torn off or obliterated, but indelible, like the water-mark in the paper; so impressed upon and interwoven with it that no power on earth can blot it out. We may, therefore, say with David: “I meditate on all Thy works; I muse on the works of Thy hands” (Ps. cxliii. 5).

...or we may simply observe that such a style of thinking is an obssessional harping on a theme, and manifestly unsound in the construction of a logical argument.

Quote:

In THE HEAVENS we see number displayed in a remarkable manner. The 12 signs of the Zodiac, each with three constellations, making 36 in all, which together with the 12 signs make a total of 48. There must be a reason, therefore, why the number 12 should thus pervade the heavens. Why should number 12 be the predominating factor? Why should it not be 11, or 13, or 7, or 20? Because 12 is one of the four perfect numbers, the number of governmental perfection; hence it is associated with the rule of the heavens, for the sun is given “to rule the day,” and the moon “to govern the night” The significance of this, will become clear when one come to consider the number “twelve”. We have thus one common measure, or factor, which is seen in the 12 signs of the Zodiac, the 36 (3x12) constellations, the total 48 (4x12); the 360˚ ( 12 x 30 ) degrees, into which the great circle of the heavens is divided. It is this division of the Zodiac which gives us the 12 months of the Zodiacal year. This called also the Prophetic year, for it is the year which is used in the prophecies of the Bible. (There are different or relative kinds of years, according as we reckon the revolutions of the sun in relation to certain objects.
The above, then, is an example of number as it is used in the heavens. Twelve is the pervading factor.

The "special quality" of 12 which you apprehend as mysterious and divinely ordained, is simply given by the finding that the Babylonian numerical system Judaism soaked was "duodecimal" i.e. was based in the number twelve. Ours is based on the decimal system, which likely originated in India and was used in Rome. The numerals themsleves, the concept of 0 and the value-positional protocol came to be imported to Europe later through the Islamic culture.

Quote:

In CHRONOLOGY we find that the first natural division of time is stamped by the number seven. On the seventh day God rested from His work of Creation. When He ordained the ritual for Israel which should show forth His work of Redemption, seven is again stamped upon it in all its times and seasons. The seventh day was the holy day; the seventh month was specially hallowed by its number of sacred festivals; the seventh year was the marked year of Jubilee (Lev. Xxv. 4, 8). There are much more examples!

The magical word, for "lucky" number "7" in Hebrew is "Sheva". It means also "oath". Again, it is hard to imagine that the number has some special design properties of the universe if the quotient of weeks (7 days) produces an error of more than a day in the annual rotation of the Earth.

Quote:

If we look at NATURE we see the same law at work in various departments of nature. Sometimes one number is the dominant factor, sometimes another. In nature seven is found to mark the only possible mode of classification of the mass of individuals which constitutes the special departments called science.
There are the 7 divisions from the animal and vegetable kingdoms, e.g. I. Kingdom, II. Sub-Kingdom, III. Class. IV. Order, V. Family, VI. Genus, VII. Species.

Actually Linnaeus used five categories: Class, Order, Genus, Species, and Variety. Later the system was revised to include Kingdom, Phylum and Family, and Species was made the final descriptor. "Variety" was dropped. I assume you believe this was made in conformance with God's "Design Specs".

Quote:

We find the same laws at work in PHYSIOLOGY, CHEMISTRY,SOUND AND MUSIC, and COLOUR . The list of examples is never-ending and VERY interesting.

...I believe they are never-ending, but "interesting" is perhaps too hopeful.

Quote:

We can have neither words nor works without “number". The question which we have to answer is- Is numbers used with design or by chance? Surely if God uses it, it must be with infinite wisdom and with glorious perfection. And so it is.

I assure you there is much more to it than that. Logically, you cannot assert as a premisse that which you are to prove.

Quote:

It is interesting to notice why these numbers should be thus associated together. They are significant in themselves, for seven is one of the four so-called perfect numbers, 3, 7, 10 and 12.
3 is the number of Divine perfection; 7 is Spiritual perfection; 10 is Ordinal perfection and 12 is Governmental perfection.
The product of these four perfect numbers forms the great number of chronological perfection. 3 x 7 x 10 x 12 = 2520, the times of Israel’s punishment, and the times of Gentile dominion over Jerusalem.

....and where did this idea originate, may I ask ?

Quote:

The association of the numbers 11 and 7 connects this arithmetical law with the geometrical, and calls our attention to the phenomina presented by the sides of the four primary rectilineal forms-
In the plane,the triangle has 3 sides, and the square has 4 sides , which equals a total of 7
In the solid, the pyramid has 5 sides, the cube has 6 sides, which makes a total of
The number 18 (the sum of these), 7+11) in Scripture and in nature is usually thus divided into 7 and 11, or 9 and 9.
As 7 is to 11, so is the height of the pyramid (whose base is a square) to the length of its base.
As 7 is to 11 expresses also the ratio between the diameter of a circle and its semi-circumference; or between a semi-circle and its chord. ETC. ETC !
.....
Regards
Carin Nel

...and further the magical property of 18 is in that 9 + 9 can be seen as the
added value of digits in the expression 2^7 x 1125
which is the natural binomial resection (i.e. division into a number which is a power of two and a whole number as a complement) of 144,000
which of course is the number of souls to be saved in the Apocalypse.

I am getting the hang of it, I think.

Thanks,

Jiri

Amaleq13 · 08-20-2006, 06:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Carin Nel

True, but with Divine inspiration. If you read my post above, you would recognise that God was the inspiration behind the writers as well as the Creator of the universe. Just read the post!

Asserting your faith in divine inspiration does not establish it as a fact so it is irrelevant to any rational discussion of the constellations.

Carin Nel · 08-21-2006, 09:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Solo

You said that "we", meaning humans, do not study Scripture's numbers seriously. You do include yourself as a member of human race, I presume.

Absolutely.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Solo

I believe you find it difficult to explain things in short. I am not so sure it has to do with the rules of this forum.

Maybe so. Do you have a problem with that?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Solo

Assuming that the "we" in the sentence above again refers to "humans" generally, let me ask you this: Are you aware that the great majority of the posters on this forum vehemently denies the very thing you assert - i.e. the inerrancy of the Scripture ?

If the answer is yes, then they obviously can imagine, "His words and His works" as NOT "absolutely perfect in every particular".

I know this very well.That is why I gave the lengthy discussion to prove that it is perfect. If you fail to see the Divine hand in Creation and the Scriptures after seriously considering my post, nothing but the Spirit of God can help you see it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Solo

But you already quoted Psalm 18:30 which simply declares God's way "perfect" without the causal link. Why can I not believe, if I wished, that it is the other way round: because God's ways are perfect, he is likely perfect also ?

Because God is the Creator of it all.bIf you don't find His "ways perfect, then you will definitely say God is NOT perfect, and because He knows how humans think, He wants us to KNOW that because He is perfect, righteous and fair, His actions and words will also be .

Quote:

Originally Posted by Solo

...and what happens when "we" see a number is used by a social custom, and as such by itself "without significance" ?

It won't change the fact that His creation and Words are perfect and significant.

.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Solo

.....or we may simply observe that such a style of thinking is an obssessional harping on a theme, and manifestly unsound in the construction of a logical argument.

Like I said, if you fail to see the significance and perfection of His Works and Words, nothing can make you see, but the Spirit of God Himself.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Solo

.....The "special quality" of 12 which you apprehend as mysterious and divinely ordained, is simply given by the finding that the Babylonian numerical system Judaism soaked was "duodecimal" i.e. was based in the number twelve. Ours is based on the decimal system, which likely originated in India and was used in Rome. The numerals themsleves, the concept of 0 and the value-positional protocol came to be imported to Europe later through the Islamic culture.

Your point?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Solo

.....The magical word, for "lucky" number "7" in Hebrew is "Sheva". It means also "oath". Again, it is hard to imagine that the number has some special design properties of the universe if the quotient of weeks (7 days) produces an error of more than a day in the annual rotation of the Earth.

The solar circle (365.24219 days) inherently does contain a station or day of the Sun (one in a 30-day cycle) and also a station or day of the Moon (one in a cycle of 7 lunar weeks).

365.24219 days (annual rate in days)
minus 19.24232 days (set-apart days)
--------------
equals 345.99987 days (= 346 days)

Thus, it seems significant to a study of Enoch's astronomical book that--as long as the cited stations of the Sun and Moon are routinely tracked apart from the other days--the length of each passing solar year is inherently metered into 346 equal divisions--on average. (Note that each of the cited 346 divisions inherently corresponds with the boundary of an exclusively counted day).
It is here very significant that the reckoning of 346 specific divisions (as exclusively counted days) results in a time span that is exactly equivalent to the length of the annual circle or year (in average time). Essentially, 346 days--when counted in association with 19.24232 renewal days per year--is equal to 365.24232 days. Thus, the annual result of routinely leaping the count of each station (or day) of the Sun and each station (or day) of the Moon is a time span that is exactly equal to the length of the annual circle or solar year (on the average). The average annual result of tracking 346 days in correspondence with stations of the Sun and Moon is perfect to within an annual difference of only 11.2 seconds! Remarkable is that the annual result of tracking stations of the Sun and Moon can be recognized as fully or absolutely perfect relative to the rate of the solar year only several centuries before. Go to this link - http://www.creation-answers.com/sevency.htm for specific information concerning the perfect accuracy inherent in tracking a station (or day) of the Sun and a station (or day) of the Moon.the perfect accuracy inherent in tracking a station (or day) of the Sun and a station (or day) of the Moon as well as the significance of reckoning Sun and Moon stations.
By tracking the cited stations of the Sun and Moon, the solar orbit can effectively (perfectly) be represented in terms of a number of day divisions (346 metered divisions). Also by tracking the very SAME stations of the Sun and Moon, the lunar orbit can effectively (perfectly) be represented in terms of a number of day divisions (28 metered divisions).
in this modern era, a simple count of months and lunar weeks can be used to define the limits of the solar year to within a difference of only 11.2 seconds too slow; however, due to the slowing spin of the Earth, astronomers who were alive at about 3000 years ago should have been able to define the solar year to within the limits of absolute or even perfect accuracy

Quote:

Originally Posted by Solo

........and further the magical property of 18 is in that 9 + 9 can be seen as the
added value of digits in the expression 2^7 x 1125
which is the natural binomial resection (i.e. division into a number which is a power of two and a whole number as a complement) of 144,000
which of course is the number of souls to be saved in the Apocalypse.

I am getting the hang of it, I think.

Thanks,

Jiri

Good for you!

Regards
Carin Nel

voodoomage · 08-21-2006, 09:44 AM

I feel like this discussion has gotten incredibly off-track. Perhaps because we started discussing ethical nihilism and numerology. Im not sure why we would even TOUCH numerology in this thread, but Carin, as always, thank you for your chain letters.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Breathe

Perhaps because we don't believe that anything too freely given, or easily won, is valuable? It would have been easy for God to say, *Poof!*"You're all forgiven evermore, forever and ever, so mote it be", but would the people of that time, who were already so used to animal and human sacrifice as a means of forgiveness, have accepted forgiveness so freely given, and involving no suffering? Perhaps the death of Jesus was not so much to wash away our sins, but instead a gesture of forgiveness that could be easily understood and accepted at that time. A symbolic gesture?

Just an idea....

Symbolism doesn't change the christian god is still a tribal deity who requires worship, ritual animal sacrifice (until he "sacrificed" his son for three days... wow), and the occassional slaughtering of his enemies, whom he later decided to forgive and save and call his children. Yeah, it makes loads of sense :huh:

greyline · 08-23-2006, 12:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Carin Nel

Let us look at the word “critic” ( Greek= ”kriticos”) Heb. 4:12. This is the origin of the word. It means “able to judge” or “ skilled in judging”; and then , simply, “a judge”, but always with the idea of his ability to judge. It occurs only in Heb. 4:12, where it is translated “a discerner.” The whole passage relates both to the written word which is a sword (Eph. 6:17); and to the living Word (Christ) who has a sword.

Carin, is your name E.W. Bullinger? On the assumption that it's not, and with due credit to Google (for Google my God), I think it's the Done Thing to cite your sources when you cut n' paste.

Speaking of which, what are the sources for the stories you posted about John Lennon, Tancredo Neves, Marilyn Monroe, the dead eggs-in-the-boot gal, etc? Presumably you have some sort of evidence for their veracity beyond the authority of your spam folder.

Carin Nel · 08-23-2006, 01:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by greyline

Carin, is your name E.W. Bullinger? On the assumption that it's not, and with due credit to Google (for Google my God), I think it's the Done Thing to cite your sources when you cut n' paste.

Speaking of which, what are the sources for the stories you posted about John Lennon, Tancredo Neves, Marilyn Monroe, the dead eggs-in-the-boot gal, etc? Presumably you have some sort of evidence for their veracity beyond the authority of your spam folder.

As you probably may not know - E.W. Bullinger does not mind that people use his work to defend God's existence as he clearly states: "... freely ye have received, freely give." (Mat 10:8)
I just happen to own the book Numbers in Scripture - by E.W. Bullinger(bought and paid for through the internet) and found out later that the complete book is published on the internet. If you really are searching for the truth, read it!
So for your information, I did not copy and paste it from the internet, but carefully chose parts from the book to use in my post.
For true Christians its not about our names or money, but about the Truth being declared.
All of us gain knowledge from other people's research and books from the time we are born. So I don't find it abnormal to use that knowledge to prove the Truth. If you say that everything you know you have gained on your own without using the knowledge and experiences from other people, you are lying.
Whatever my "sin", what I've posted is still worth considering and nothing can take away the Truth in the post. It's an argument that you have to consider seriously, no matter where the original knowledge comes from.
I see that a popular tendency among you is to try to lead the readers off the track by hammering on unimportant parts in the posts.

The fact that you all ignore the facts of Divine Inspiration in the Scriptures as well as in nature after studying my post (taken from - "Numbers in Scripture!!), just confirm and prove to me what the very Scriptures say:

Rom. 1:19 + 20-"For that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God has shewed it unto them. For the invisible things of Him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse.."

Mt.15:14-"Let them alone: they be blind leaders of the blind. And if the blind lead the blind, both shall fall into the ditch."

Regards
Carin Nel

Diogenes the Cynic · 08-23-2006, 07:29 AM

Carin, do not post copyrighted material on IIDB without attribution

DtC, Moderator, BC&H

greyline · 08-23-2006, 09:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Carin Nel

Whatever my "sin", what I've posted is still worth considering and nothing can take away the Truth in the post. It's an argument that you have to consider seriously, no matter where the original knowledge comes from.

The "sin" is called, in literary terms, plagiarism - presenting someone else's work as your own.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Carin Nel

I see that a popular tendency among you is to try to lead the readers off the track by hammering on unimportant parts in the posts.

Regarding a previous post of yours, the stories demonstrating how God has a tendency to smite people if they say something mean about him, I don't believe I'm hammering on an unimportant part in the post when I ask for your source for those stories. A newspaper article about the fatal car crash, for example? A corroborating report that John Lennon or Marylin Monroe actually said those words? How do you know someone didn't just make all that up?

More importantly, does it even matter to you whether it was made up?

Relating this back to the OP, the scriptures, tell us about why "Jesus had to die". Is your standard of proof for the scriptures simply "they're factual because they're divinely inspired?" I can accept that as part of your belief, but what's your standard of proof for those stories you posted?

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

08-23-2006, 07:29 AM	#99
Diogenes the Cynic Moderator - Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Twin Cities, Minnesota Posts: 4,639	Carin, do not post copyrighted material on IIDB without attribution DtC, Moderator, BC&H

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.