More Comments On Analysis Reb
More Comments on “Computer Proof … ”
I noticed your statement regarding proof of the Bible, with information taken from Dr. Ivan Panin. I, for one, accept the Bible as fully authoritative and inerrant in the classic sense of the term. However, the apologetic method adopted by Dr. Panin, Jerry Lucas, G.E. Hoyer, and others, in which the numeric sums of the words must be divisible by certain numbers, is extremely dubious and unreliable. This particular form of apologetics (“See how the numbers all add up and divide neatly? Only God could make it work out that way!”) is known as Biblical Numerics, and I suggest you look into it more thoroughly before adopting it or posting it publicly.
Henry M. Morris has a section on Bible Numerics in his apologetic textbook, MANY INFALLIBLE PROOFS, but he relegated it to the appendix because it was so questionable. Oswald T. Allis wrote a booklet called BIBLE (or BIBLICAL?) NUMERICS, published by Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing Co., which shows how Panin fudged the data to make everything come out all right. Unless you’re familiar with orthodox methods of determining the wording used in the Greek NT and textual criticism in general, you may not be able to appreciate what Panin did — he came up with his own Greek text of the NT, based not on manuscript dating, patristic quotations, or the consensus of various versions in Latin, Aramaic, etc., but based solely on whether his divisions came out exactly! (I have a copy of Panin’s “Numeric New Testament,” by the way.)
You should also be aware that the Muslims used exactly the same scheme to prove the inspiration of the Qur’an. You see, in Arabic the letters of the alphabet can stand for numbers, too. There have been several Muslim books published on “The Inspiration of the Qur’an Scientifically Demonstrated,” applying the same methodology. I saw a copy of such a book at Waldenbooks just 2 weeks ago.
Also, the occultic Jewish system called the cabala (alternately spelled “kabbala”, “qabbala”, etc.) employed a similar methodology called gematria to prove their occultic interpretations of the Torah, several centuries before Panin was born. You don’t believe me? Look up the word “gematria” in Webster’s THIRD INTERNATIONAL DICTIONARY (the big, unabridged edition that only libraries use).
Since my particular interest is apologetics and the defense of the Christian faith, I’m always on the lookout for good ways of presenting the validity of the Bible to unbelievers. After awhile, I ran across the system called Biblical Numerics. However, after looking at it more closely, I came to believe it’s something which causes more problems than it solves. And if the same “numeric phenomena” also occur in demonically inspired books like the Qur’an, then it’s no proof or evidence of divine inspiration anyway. My advice is, Look before you post this file. Thanks!