3 questions about Christianity

I Like Pencils

I'll send you to Heaven.
Registered Senior Member
Many people believe that the Bible ‘wasn’t’ written by God, so who wrote it?
Why does it contain so many numbers? It’s so unorthodox to put as many numbers in a normal book as there are in the Bible.
What is the Bible code?
 
" Many people believe that the Bible ‘wasn’t’ written by God, so who wrote it?"
Just about every christian believes that it wasn't written directly by God. As to who wrote it, prophets, historians, and even story tellers.

Why does it contain so many numbers? It’s so unorthodox to put as many numbers in a normal book as there are in the Bible.
Numbers can have symbolic meaning.

What is the Bible code?
I think it's attempt to find bibical codes by adding up numerical words etc.
 
Originally posted by I Like Pencils
Why does it contain so many numbers? It’s so unorthodox to put as many numbers in a normal book as there are in the Bible.
What is the Bible code?
Well, for one, the Bible isn't a "normal book" - it was compiled from a variety of sources over a long time. Their main consistency is that all the books have something to do with God. It was "unorthodox" because it makes clear that God was completely separate and different from the many other gods that were popular during its history. This "complete otherness" is the principle of the word "holy".

One form of this "uniqueness" was expressed by the ancient Hebrew in the Gematria - a numerological system where each letter in the Hebrew alphabet had a specific value, also found in the Roman numerals I, C, M, X, etc. It can be seen as an early form of geometry, although the main idea was that God created structure (fixed proportions) among chaos - numbers and letters became "building blocks" of meaning. This was made very visible when the Tower of Babel could not be completed when the builder's "words" were confused.

These values could be used to decribe connotations and information without having to use explicit words, and they also had symbolic meanings. A name could written in code form to protect the writer, while the meaning remained intact. They seven days of the week are a direct example of such a use (the seven-day week is the only chronological structure that can't be derived from nature itself). A modern example is the structure of a sonnet, although the numerological relationships of the Gematria have the air of 'being discovered' rather than 'invented' - like the Law of Pythagoras existed even before it was discovered. Some have said the whole universe was constructed using mathematical principles that can be expressed using words. The Hebrew for "Ten Commandments" are literally "the ten words". The Bible as the "word" of God is another example. John also shows something of it in the sentence "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God" (John 1:1).

The Bible Code is an attempt to reconstruct the whole of the Bible using this system, and to look for hidden meanings and connections that appear. I think that because most of the Hebrew Bible was originally oral, the Hebrews used mathematical and alphabetical patterns to memorize it, many connections are found this way, but there is no way of kwowong which of these "codes" are intentional and which are unintentional. The codes were in any case only supportive, creating structure and emphasizing meaning, but not "hidden messages" by themselves. To make to much of it is defeating its purpose.
 
Last edited:
Re: Re: 3 questions about Christianity

Originally posted by Jenyar
Well, for one, the Bible isn't a "normal book" - it was compiled from a variety of sources over a long time. Their main consistency is that all the books have something to do with God.

Well, that and the fact that they were all the same size, hence the term "canonical" or "canon" in refrence to the Bible we all know.
 
Re: Re: 3 questions about Christianity

Originally posted by Jenyar-of-the-70-Books
Well, for one, the Bible isn't a "normal book" - it was compiled from a variety of sources over a long time. Their main consistency is that all the books have something to do with God.
Jenyar at his/her best. :D
 
Re: Re: Re: 3 questions about Christianity

Originally posted by perfectblue
Well, that and the fact that they were all the same size, hence the term "canonical" or "canon" in refrence to the Bible we all know.
Huh? :confused:
 
Re: Re: Re: Re: 3 questions about Christianity

Originally posted by ConsequentAtheist
Huh? :confused:

Well, I learned in college that the Bible was pieced together because the books:
a) all followed the same "theme", Judao-Christianity;
b) were written by recognized sources at the time; and
c) were canonical, as they were all the same heighth and width.

The books were measured before they were selected, recopied, and bound, hence why you have the "Canon" (Bible) and the "Non-Canonical" (Aprocypha). This is what I learned, and I could be wrong, so feel free to correct me if you have the sources and proof to back it up.
 
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: 3 questions about Christianity

Originally posted by perfectblue
The books were measured before they were selected, recopied, and bound, hence why you have the "Canon" (Bible) and the "Non-Canonical" (Aprocypha). This is what I learned, and I could be wrong, so feel free to correct me if you have the sources and proof to back it up.
I'm sorry, perfectblue, but I honestly don't have a clue as to what you're talking about. Are you sure that you're not referring to 'Codex'?

There are any number of sources on NT-Canon history. You might consider picking up Bruce Metzger's The Canon of the New Testament: Its Origin, Development, and Significance. Also ...
The idea of a complete and clear-cut canon of the New Testament existing from the beginning, that is from Apostolic times, has no foundation in history. The Canon of the New Testament, like that of the Old, is the result of a development, of a process at once stimulated by disputes with doubters, both within and without the Church, and retarded by certain obscurities and natural hesitations, and which did not reach its final term until the dogmatic definition of the Tridentine Council.

- see Canon of the New Testament
 
Perhaps he means "measured" as in "judged". But I don't know whether physical measurements were possible, or even considered. I assume the standards of making codices or rolls varied from region to region.
 
Greetings perfectblue,

c) were canonical, as they were all the same heighth and width.


No, canonical does not refer to heighth [sic] and width (but its origin carries some of that idea) :

The word "canon" derives ultimately from the Greek "kanon" (akin to the English "cane") referring to a reed. Reeds were used for measurement, and in Latin and later Greek the word "canon" meant a rule or a standard. The establishment of a canon of scriptures within Christianity was meant to define a standard or a rule for the religion. The above non-technical academic usages stem from this instance of a defined and accepted body of work. Alongside this usage was the promulgation of "canons" ("rules") for the government of the Catholic Church. The usages relating to religious law derive from this use of the Latin "canon". It may also be related to arabic "qanun" (law).


Iasion
 
Wow. Thank you all for that...you see, I went to a Southern Baptist college for a bit, and my education in areas is...ahem...lacking... :bugeye:

At any rate, I had a strange and biased "Understanding The Bible" teacher, which was a required class as a freshman. So anything I may spew out onto these forums is, well, strange and biased. But that's why I signed up here - to learn.

I'm glad I was at least partially right on the meaning of "canon"...
 
Back
Top