• Welcome to Christian Forums
  1. Welcome to Christian Forums, a forum to discuss Christianity in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

  2. The forums in the Christian Congregations category are now open only to Christian members. Please review our current Faith Groups list for information on which faith groups are considered to be Christian faiths. Christian members please remember to read the Statement of Purpose threads for each forum within Christian Congregations before posting in the forum.

Proof of the Bible's Supernatural Nature?

Discussion in 'Controversial Christian Theology' started by Saidative, Aug 8, 2016.

  1. Saidative

    Saidative New Member

    7
    +2
    Christian
    Married
    Sorry for the length of this post. You actually only have to read (skim) like half of it to get what I'm saying, though. I put the rest just in case anyone's into this stuff. Basically, I'm just trying to get my theory evaluated by some fellow Bible Enthusiasts. Also, I wouldn't mind hearing anyone else's possible proof of the Bible's supernatural nature. As I believe my theory, along with a handful of others that I've learned online, prove the supernatural nature of the Word. For example, stuff like the Torah Name Code", where you translate the name meanings of the Bible figures in succession with their Bloodline Generations, to combine and create prophetic sentences. Or maybe geological discoveries that corroborate the Bible. Like Ron Wyatt's work, possibly. Or Ivan Panin's work, if you've ever heard of him. He's great. But yeah, basically prophetic proof and stuff like that. My theory involves a lot of "prophetic parallels". I think people should lump all this type of stuff together and push it on the Church/masses more, to build faith. Because it feels like there's quite a bit of Biblical proof out there that far too many Christians don't know about. It seems like, anyway.

    My theory is that all the objects (words) in the Bible always keep their symbolic, referential integrity. In such a way that it couldn't have possibly been done naturally. Meaning, for example, if “water” parallels the Holy Spirit in one part of the Bible, it'll parallel the Holy Spirit in all it's parts of the Bible. It always keeps its symbolic reference. Even with the Flood, for example. Just think how it's like the Flood washed the Earth clean from sin, in a way... right? It's a “referential” parallel because it's like how the Holy Spirit cleanses us of our sins. And that's just a small example. It's not just water, either. It's everything. And it's way more specific and thorough than you'd think, too.

    And I've also figured out that coupled with applying this “referential integrity” principle, you can find "hidden, prophetic parallels" that reveal hidden truths. One great thing about it is, it's something that can be proven or dis-proven. It's not an opinion. All you have to do is find one verse where the words don't keep their referential integrity to disprove it. I know that doesn't seem that cool now, but you'll see how specific and exact it is, if you read through about half of this post. I've created a few lengthy Youtube videos showing my findings.

    I feel like my theories on the Bible's “Symbolic, Referential Integrity” solve at least 5 or 6 of the Bible's greatest mysteries. I feel like one would need to watch at least 17 minutes of this video here,

    “The Bible has Referential Integrity”:

    ..to be convinced that I'm on to something (or my “70,7's” Video, or maybe just read this entire post). I have a few slow moving parts during that first 17 minutes, so getting people to sit through it is not the easiest task. Although, currently I have about 140 “Shares” on my Youtube Videos about this stuff. And over 100 Thumb's Ups in just a few months. Here's a few, back to back excerpts from it, followed by me touching on a few more discoveries that I've found in the Bible. They all tie-in together beautifully, too.

    Excerpt:
    The Cedar Branch stands for the “House of David”. The Hyssop Branch stands for the “Gentile Branch” that needs to get “grafted in” with the scarlet “blood tie”. So we're talking about the “cedar wood and the scarlet and the hyssop”, from the Animal Sacrifices.

    Levit 14: 6 He is then to take the live bird and dip it, together with the cedar wood, the scarlet yarn and the hyssop, into the blood of the bird that was killed over the fresh water.

    The Sacrifices that denote Gentile and have the animals getting killed outside and away from the Temple (opposed to Sacrifices like Lamb's that are “Jewish”(Christ) and killed inside the Temple area). They're done away from the Temple because the Gentiles haven't been branched-in yet. The Gentiles getting branched-in is one thing that those sacrifices depict/symbolize.

    Here's some verses that go with “Cedar” standing for “the House of David”(Jewish):

    This is from when David was talking to the Prophet Nathan about possibly building a Temple:

    2 Sam 7:2 “Look, I am living in a palace made of cedar wood, but the Ark of God is in a tent!”

    And then The Lord's response through the Prophet Nathan.

    2 Sam 7:5 “Go and tell my servant David, ‘This is what the Lord says: Will you build a house for me to live in? ...I have never said to the tribes, whom I commanded to take care of my people Israel, “Why haven’t you built me a house of cedar?”’

    1 Kings 6:9 So he built the temple and completed it, roofing it with beams and cedar planks. ...The height of each was five cubits, and they were attached to the temple by beams of cedar.

    The beams and what-not in the Temple were made of Cedar. The Temples were put up to be knocked down. Now think of what Rabbi Cahn says about the Cedar Tree planted at Ground Zero after 9/11. It was planted as a symbol to come back stronger. It replaced the Sycamore Tree, and Cahn says “Cedar Tree's are put up to fall”, here take a listen (play clip).

    ((In the video, I play a clip of Rabbi Cahn talking about the Cedar Tree that replaced the Sycamore Tree at Ground Zero. The Cedar Tree (Symbolically Christ) replaced the Sycamore Tree (Satan), and was taken out on Passover (like Christ was taken out on P.O.) during the 1st Blood Moon. What I say goes perfectly with Rabbi Cahn's findings.))

    So.. just like the “Cedar Branch House of David”, which was the Temple, and the Cedar Tree (like was planted at Ground 0), Christ was put here to replace the Sycamore Tree (Satan) and to be knocked down (sacrificed) like the last two Temples were (or, Cedar Houses of David)... and also like the Cedar Tree at Ground Zero was knocked down (taken out). They were all “knocked down” after they took the place of something. If this is all true, than that would make the Sycamore Tree Satan, right? You know, because Christ replaced him?

    Excerpt:
    Now we're going to get back into the Sycamore Tree, then, after that.. we'll see some good examples of “Inverted Prophetic Parallels”.

    Rabbi Cahn talks about the Sycamore Tree that got knocked down on 9/11. Then they plant the Cedar Tree to come back stronger. Cahn says, "symbolically interpreted, the Cedar is planted so that it can be knocked down. And it was, right? It kind of withered like Christ on the cross. Getting put up, just to be knocked down is like being a sacrifice, right?

    The parallels are, the Sycamore is Satan, and the Cedar gets put up in his place as a sacrifice. It's a sacrifice AND it means "strong" too, because they said “they'll come back stronger” after 9-11, that's what the Cedar Tree they planted was supposed to signify, like Christ being stronger than Satan. Even the Temples made of Cedar were knocked down, right? 2 of them were knocked down. The 2nd can symbolize the Witnesses, as they have Cedar Blood in them, and are a sacrifice. 2 halves of Cedar Blood (mixed w/ 2 halves of Gentile Blood, meaning it literally gets branched-in), so that'd be 1 Temple (2 halves). One good parallel that shows this is the door-posts from Passover. You smear the Blood on the top and side door-posts only. Not the bottom. It's a picture of Christ's Blood going down through the Cedar Branch to the 2 Witnesses. Remember, Christ was a Carpenter. It all parallels each other.

    Excerpt:
    At least four times the Sycamore Tree is mentioned in the Bible as being in the lowlands, in at least 2 different books:
    1 Kings 10:27 ...he made cedars as plentiful as sycamore trees that are in the lowland.
    2 Chron 1:15...he made cedars as plentiful as sycamores in the lowland.


    What does the “lowland” parallel? The Valley of the Shadow of Death, right? It also parallels the “Giants in the Valley”. The Giants were Gentiles that came from Fallen Angel Blood and/or Satan Blood, if you will. It's all stuff that has to do with the Gentile/Hyssop Branch. They're all Satan Parallels.

    Check it out:
    David Defeats the Philistines
    2 Sam 5:18 Now the Philistines had come and spread out in the Valley of Rephaim; 19 so David inquired of the Lord, “Shall I go and attack the Philistines? Will you deliver them into my hands?”
    The Lord answered him, “Go, for I will surely deliver the Philistines into your hands.”
    20 So David went to Baal Perazim, and there he defeated them. He said, “As waters break out, the Lord has broken out against my enemies before me.” So that place was called Baal Perazim. 21 The Philistines abandoned their idols there, and David and his men carried them off.


    Notice the name Baal Perazim? From the list of the servants of David in Chronicles, this guy named Baal-hanan was in charge of the Sycamore Trees in the foothills. Foothills is another word for lowlands:1 Chronicles 27:28 Baal-Hanan the Gederite was in charge of the olive and sycamore-fig trees (and there's also that verse about figs falling, right? Like, as in Fallen Angels from a Sycamore) in the western foothills. See how it's always some lowlands?

    Here's what Baal-Hanan's name means:
    Theological Dictionary assumes that the Baal-part refers to the god Baal and reads Baal Is Gracious.

    Nice, huh? See how you can just “shoot around” to different parts of the Bible that has the same word, and see if it parallels? Now, what about the Cedar Tree? Here's some verses that have Cedar Trees on a mountain:
    Isaiah 37:24 ... I came up to the heights of the mountains, To the remotest parts of Lebanon; And I cut down its tall cedars and its choice cypresses And I will go to its highest peak, its thickest forest.

    It says the same thing in 2 Kings 19:23 "With my many chariots I came up to the heights of the mountains, To the remotest parts of Lebanon; And I cut down its tall cedars and its choice cypresses And I entered its farthest lodging place, its thickest forest. Ezekiel 31:3 'Behold, Assyria was a cedar in Lebanon With beautiful branches and forest shade, And very high, And its top was among the clouds.

    Ezekiel 17:22-23 (Is this one talking about David and then Christ?) Thus says the Lord GOD, "I will also take a sprig from the lofty top of the cedar and set it out; I will pluck from the topmost of its young twigs a tender one and I will plant it on a high and lofty mountain. "On the high mountain of Israel I will plant it, that it may bring forth boughs and bear fruit and become a stately cedar. And birds ( I believe birds represent Angel Blood getting grafted into the Cedar, more on that later) of every kind will nest under it; they will nest in the shade of its branches. Later on I talk about how the Gentile Branch has Angel Blood in it, as I believe they (Gentiles) started with the Nephilem.

    I'll leave a link to all the Cedar and Sycamore verses below and you can see for yourself that there isn't any verses that have Cedars on low-ground, or Sycamores on high-ground. It couldn't possibly all be like that by chance. Well, maybe it could be, but not when everything else is the same way. As far as I've found, anyway.

    Excerpt:
    Check it out in Revelation 11:
    I was given a reed like a measuring rod and was told, “Go and measure the temple of God and the altar, with its worshipers. 2 But exclude the outer court; do not measure it, because it has been given to the Gentiles. They will trample on the holy city for 42 months. 3 And I will appoint my two witnesses, and they will prophesy for 1,260 days, clothed in sackcloth.” 4 They are “the two olive trees” and the two lampstands, and “they stand before the Lord of the earth.”


    Meaning, the Temple gets built by using the Witnesses' Gentile Family Tree (reed branch). The Witnesses' Family are the Temple sacrifices. There's no outside court because now that the body is the Temple, they don't need that area for killing animals in the entrance, because we're the new sacrifice. They used to kill some of the animals in the entrance. The Bread Table is like holding the Bible/ the Word, and the Minora set-up is the Angels/High Priests/Shepherds highlighting the bread for you. Shedding light on it. Perry Stone explains it all in his Youtube Video titled “Breath of the Holies”. I'll leave a link below. He parallels all the parts of the Temple and the Temple furniture to other parts of the Bible. Watching that video is how I first got started down this road of parallels. He doesn't have what the animal sacrifices parallel, though. I'll tell you those later on. Also in that Witnesses verse, there's the Gentiles during the first 42 months again. The Times of the Gentiles. So.. “reed” has to parallel the Gentile Branch and also we're going to have to look at the “lamp stand” and “Olive Trees”. First we'll start with the word “reed” in the Bible.

    There's this one:
    Job 40:21 He lieth under the shady trees, in the covert of the reed, and fens. Meaning, it's in a low area. Like the Sycamore Trees and the Valley of Giants and the Valley of the Shadow of Death and stuff.

    And then this one:Isaiah 35:7 And the parched ground shall become a pool, and the thirsty land springs of water: in the habitation of dragons, where each lay, shall be grass with reeds and rushes.Dragons with it, that denotes Satan.
    Then, there's at least a couple like this:
    Ezekiel 40:5 And behold a wall on the outside of the house round about, and in the man's hand a measuring reed of six cubits long by the cubit and an hand breadth: so he measured the breadth of the building, one reed; and the height, one reed.

    6, meaning the corrupted number, because the Bible says everything man-made is corrupted and 6 is the number of a man. The Devine Number is 7, meaning the Christ Branch. Gentile Blood is like 6, meaning corrupted. And Christ's Blood is like 7.

    Moses in the basket with the Reeds is, "he was hidden in with the Egyptians/ Gentiles, just like he was hidden in with the Reeds in the River. And this verse right here also goes with that:

    Ezekiel 29:6-7 "Then all the inhabitants of Egypt will know that I am the LORD, Because they have been only a staff made of reed to the house of Israel. Meaning Egyptians come from the Reed Branch.

    In Pharoah's dream, he's by the Nile with Reeds and cursed cows and stuff. Look:
    41 When two full years had passed, Pharaoh had a dream: He was standing by the Nile, 2 when out of the river there came up seven cows, sleek and fat, and they grazed among the reeds. 3 After them, seven other cows, ugly and gaunt, came up out of the Nile and stood beside those on the riverbank. 4 And the cows that were ugly and gaunt ate up the seven sleek, fat cows. Then Pharaoh woke up.

    This is a picture of the Reeds being in the cursed bloodline, amongst other things. More on “River's meaning bloodlines” later. Here's a good one that goes with the Egyptians being from the “reed”/ Gentile Branch:2 Kings 18:21 Look, I know you are depending on Egypt, that splintered reed of a staff, which pierces the hand of anyone who leans on it! Such is Pharaoh king of Egypt to all who depend on him.

    Which means the Reed bites you like a snake. lol Cool, huh? There's another verse with a similar phrase in Isaiah too. Basically, it's like all the rods and stocks, and stuff like that, that parallel the line of the Gentiles. Just think about “staff's changing into snakes”, “ruling with an iron rod”, and “Asherah Poles” and stuff like that. You can probably already see how all those would go. I'm not trying to make a 5-hour video, but to me, the “Prophetic Parallels” do prove the supernatural nature of the Bible. The “Brass Snake Idol” from the Wilderness with Moses would also go with this stuff. I actually am going to talk about that here in a bit, though. But, one thing that these parallel in the world is an “obselisk”. Right? You guys already know where I'm going. The Washington Monument, Eifel Tower, Big Ben, that one at the Vatican. All that. They love it, it honors their bloodline.

    That's the end of my excerpts. Now I'll just briefly hit on some of the other discoveries I've made.

    All the Feasts are done twice. Once by Christ and once by the Witnesses. I'll give you the abbreviated explanation for the Feast of Trumpets and also Passover... to give an example of what I'm talking about.

    For the first, “Pre-Trib F.O.T.”, completed by the Witnesses, the 2 Witnesses spot the Moon. Symbolically, the Cresent Moon stands for Satan and also the Muslim Flag. That's what that Feast illustrates while simultaneously reigning in the New Year (beginning of the 7). The Anti-christ persecutes the 2 Witnesses, which will be a king and a prophet (David and Daniel, the 2 Horns from the Ram in Daniel 8. The King Horn grows up 2nd and higher up. 2 Ram's Horns are 2 Shofars, like the Witnesses blow for the F.O.T. The Ram (Witts) takes the place of the “Gentile Red Heifer”, like the Ram took the place of the “Jewish Red Heifer”, Isaac. Every sacrifice has a Jew “back in the day” parallel, as well as a Gentile, “end times” future parallel). Just like the Lamb turned into Christ, all the sacrifices turn into a person. Of course, right? Why wouldn't they. The Feasts and Sacrifices are a “shadow” of what's to come. I mean, why would the Lamb be the only one to turn into a person?

    The 2nd, Christ completed F.O.T., after 4 years of the Tribulation, is where Christ (the Sun, opposite of Moon) comes back after the 7th Trump (Rev 19). The 7th Trump is also a “last trump” just like the F.O.T. Rapture has a “last trump” (1 Cor 15). There's essentially 2 “last trumps”. One for the Rapture and one for Christ's return.

    When the “Anti-” of Satan, the “Anti-” of the one who went after and killed the 2 Witnesses comes back, He (Christ) goes after the 12th Imam (AC) and the Pope (False Prophet). It's an “anti-parallel”. Christ persecutes the AC and False Prophet (King and Prophet parallel). And the “invert parallel” is Satan persecuting the King and Prophet, Witness Pair.

    And the Crescent Moon sighting goes with the Muslim flag, as the star is canted (on the flag). It's basically an upside down star (Goat Head) and the crescent moon is a snake shape, meaning the Witnesses will spot the AC (crescent moon) coming to kick off “the week of 7”.

    And how do I know Christ can parallel the Sun? Lots of reasons, but a couple things from the Bible are, the 2 “morning stars” and Satan as a Lion... and also the False Prophet depicted as a Lamb w/ Horns. Peter calls Satan a Lion in Peter 5:8. So Satan was the Lion that went after the Lamb (Christ). And during the End Times, Christ will be the Lion that goes after the Lamb w/ Horns (False Prophet from Rev 13). An “invert parallel”.

    And then, in that same vein... at first the “Morning/Day Star”(Sun) was Satan, and then Christ takes his spot when Peter calls Him the “Day Star”... hence, Him taking Satan's place as the Sun. The Moon and Stars come with the darkness (shadow of death) and inhabit the 2nd Heaven, like Satan. Before Christ's “1st Coming”, Satan was called the “morning star” (Sun). That would've symbolically made Christ the “Moon” because Christ wasn't here yet. He was “dark”, symbolically. It all has to do with Christ taking Satan's place as the High Priest, Gentile Patriarch... just like He took the place of Adam (2nd Adam) as the King, Jewish Patriarch. Christ is both the King and High Priest when He comes back. The 2 Witnesses are the interim King and High Priest until He returns. David and Daniel. There's a code with the the first letters of Bible figure's names that I can tell you about, too. It goes right with the “referential integrity” stuff. So to reiterate... for the F.O.T., the first one completed is the “Moon” persecuting the “King” and “Prophet” Witnesses. And then for the second one, you have the “Day Star” going after the “King of Muslims” and “False Prophet”.



    Then, the 2 Passover Feasts that get completed, once by a Jewish Christ and the 2nd by the Gentile Witnesses (2 to help 1), is illustrated really well in Daniel's 70, 7's. Daniel's 70, 7's consists of 3 verses ending with Daniel 9:27. It goes from “back in the day” times, to “End Times” right towards the middle of the verses, when Daniel 9:27 abruptly goes from the 69, 7's (decree to rebuild to Christ, 7x69=483 yrs) to the last 7 as the End Times Week of 7, look:

    Daniel 9:27 He will confirm a covenant with many for one 'seven.' In the middle of the 'seven' he will put an end to sacrifice and offering.

    That means the AC killing the 2 Witnesses at the 42 month mark of the Trib (on P.O. if U start the Trib at the F.O.T.), and putting an end to the sacrifices w/ the Scape-Goat sacrifice (both Witnesses are one half Goat and one half Ram. Ram's have Lamb's Blood (Jewish) because Ram's used to be Lamb's). Both the Scape-Goat and the Ram Sacrifices happen when the AC kills the 2 Witnesses on Passover. Also, the “Bird, Leprosy Sacrifice” happens then, too. The “2 Birds”, Leprosy Sacrifice is the same thing as the Scape-Goat Sacrifice, only with Birds... and also this part:

    Levit 14: 6 He is then to take the live bird and dip it, together with the cedar wood, the scarlet yarn and the hyssop, into the blood of the bird that was killed over the fresh water.

    Cedar Wood stands for the Jew Branch, and Hyssop the Gentile. It's the Gentile Branch getting branched into the Jewish Tree. Biblically, a Bird stands for a “good” Angel and the Goat stands for a Fallen Angel. They only do the Cedar and Hyssop, “blood tie” thing for the Bird Sacrifice (between those 2 sacrifices, that is. Also, they have it with the Red Heifer), meaning only the “good” Angel Blood gets grafted-in, not the Goat (AC) Blood. So the Bird Sacrifice is also completed when the Witnesses get killed.

    Only the Bird that goes free is not the AC, like it is with the Scape-Goat Sacrifice. It's the Witnesses' kid/ Red Heifer that goes free for the Rapture. Once again, that's the Ram taking its place, paralleling the Abraham and Isaac Story.

    And that Red Heifer is the New Temple that the Witnesses rebuild. The Body is now the Temple. A Child is the only acceptable Gentile Sacrifice because it's the only possible “innocent” Sacrifice available. It's how they get grafted-in. And White People are the Gentiles with the Angel Blood. The Bible says the Gentiles spread the Gospel. That was definitely White People.

    Check it out, you can “back-flip” that “End Times” week of 7 in Daniel 9:27, to the week of Unleavened Bread that Christ died and came back in (both weeks of 7). 3 and a half days into the week Christ appears to Mary alive, the opposite of the “Gentile, Goat Sacrifice” dieing half-way thru the 7. Witts die half way thru, Christ comes to life half way thru. Witts “born” at the beginning of a 7. Christ dies at the beginning of a 7. There's a whole lot more to it, all using the same mechanics. This whole video right here is solely on just the 70, 7's and has a bunch of more, even crazier stuff in it. Feast dates encoded with the “70,7's” for the next couple of years. You have to see this!

    "Daniel's 70, 7's Decoded" LINK:

    And at the very end of that “The Bible has Referential Integrity” video, it shows how Christ gave Mary Magdalene a kid. That's also why He appears to her as a Gardner. You know, to plant a seed. The video shows how there's such a thing as an “invert” parallel. The “invert parallel” at the end of that video that shows how Christ gave Mary a baby is...

    when Christ is on the cross and the Mary's raise up a Hyssop Branch (Gentile Branch) with a sponge of crappy Vinegar Wine to Christ on the cross. The Invert is, a Cedar Branch (Davidic Line) going to Mary with Christ's Blood (Good Wine) in an earthen vessel (Baby). Some real Dan Brown stuff. LOL. You'll probably have to watch the video to really get that, though.

    And to explain more of the "Hitler's death being directly across from Christ's birth" thing, in the timeline at the beginning of that Referential Integrity video, even know that video's not really about that timeline... so to help explain more of that, and also to explain one of the sacrifices that I haven't yet talked about, there's the Heifer Sacrifice where the Heifer's neck gets broken after being led down a path next to a river... with unsewn land also next to the path. In the Bible, you do that sacrifice when someone's killed and no one saw who did it.

    The back in the day "flip" parallel of this is Moses. A Jew who sewed next to a cursed river (no Holy Sprit, Christ hadn't come yet, cursed Nile), and was killed and no one saw who did it. The Gentile version of this sacrifice is where a Man that had access to the Holy Spirit (River next to path), doesn't sew for the Lord (unsewn land). It's one of the Witnesses' Father. Note that the water can be used to water plants (sew), and also that the Holy Spirit wasn't around for Moses (cursed river), but is now (regular river for that “Heifer sacrifice” to be completed).

    Nobody saw who killed Moses. Moses died on a Mountain and was buried in a Valley. Goliath was killed in a Valley and buried on a hill. So there's one Gentile to Jew, death to life parallel, to go along with that “week of 7” from Daniel 9:27. It's like this with the whole Bible, though. With everything in it. There's a lot more.

    Another fact that I'd like to give you in this Email, that I feel would impress the most, while still being able to convey in a couple of sentences is...

    for the "666 Verse", just to decode a part of it, the Bible says that there's multiple anti-christs. 666 can mean putting 6 before the 7... man's corrupted way before the Lord's "7" way. Anti-christ's don't make it through to the 7, they get taken out right before, like the coming "Trib" anti-christ will get taken out before the 7th year. (also Cain's curse, he dies before the 7th gen)

    For the "# of a man" part, in the "666 verse".. Hitler was taken out right before the WW2 Shemitah, 7 yr period was finished. He was also born at almost the same time in the 7th year of a Shemitah. In the Shemitah he was born in, he was born into it 6 yrs, 6 mo, & 66.6% thru the 7th month, on the 6th day of Unleavened Bread. The 66.6% could be the "calculation that takes wisdom" part of the "666 verse". And the 7 days of Unleavened Bread can parallel the Trib, too. And he didn't make it to the 7th day. There's a lot, lot, lot more to it. You should check it out.

    Oh, and here's one more quick 1. when the Catholics are "crossing themselves", they're making a pyramid w/ the "all-seeing eye", Pineal Gland on top. You should check me out. I have all the Temple sacrifices and Feasts decoded and everything. I can tell you all of them and where they parallel at, "coded parallel style", at other parts of the Bible. I got the formula from Perry Stone and took it up a notch.

    Here's the 1st Video of my 5-part series entitled,
    “Times of the Gentile's Shemitah, 666, and the 70, 7's” LINK:

    What do you guys think? Are you buying this stuff? Does anyone else have any interesting "proof" of the Bible's Supernatural Nature? I know quite a bit of other people's findings, like Ivan Panin's and them. This is the coolest stuff to me.
     
    We teamed up with Faith Counseling. Can they help you today?
  2. alexandriaisburning

    alexandriaisburning Well-Known Member

    670
    +192
    Christian
    Private
    My apologies, first of all, in that I didn't read all that you wrote. However, from an epistemological perspective, I believe what you've found is fool's gold. I don't mean this in an offensive way, but in the literal meaning of "fool's gold", a substitute that does not approach the real thing.

    What I mean by this is simple. When we speak of "proof for the supernatural origin" of the Scriptures, the very language we use dooms the quest from the outset. By the very fact of suggesting that the Scriptures have a supernatural origin, we remove any possibility of providing proof about the very thing that is under investigation.

    For example, when we say that "this" or "that" *proves* the supernatural origin of the Scriptures, this very claim presupposes that we *know* what supernatural actions look like. However, by virtue of them being "supernatural", the very thing we are trying to investigate eludes our epistemological capacity, for we are domain-limited by the subjectivity of human thinking. Regardless of the "proofs" we present, as impressive as they might be, we still lack the facilities and means by which to demonstrate that they have anything supernatural about them. Stated in another way, the only way to "prove" that something has a supernatural origin is to compare it to something else that we know has a supernatural origin. However, as we are incapable of transcending the subjectivity and non-supernaturalism of our own thinking, not only do we lack any comparisons, we don't even have the facilities to demonstrate that something is or isn't supernatural to begin with.

    This does not mean, of course, that the Scriptures *don't* have a supernatural origin; they very well may have precisely this. However, given the lack of tools that we have to verify such a claim, it's hard to see any scenario in which the "proofs" we might provide have any actual correlation to the thing we are trying to prove.
     
  3. SkyWriting

    SkyWriting The Librarian Supporter

    +5,381
    United States
    Non-Denom
    Married
    US-Others
    Only natural events can be supported. Non-natural forces naturally cannot be repeated or controlled.
    Even science cannot prove anything happened. It can only repeat events and hope they are similar to past events.
     
  4. SkyWriting

    SkyWriting The Librarian Supporter

    +5,381
    United States
    Non-Denom
    Married
    US-Others
    I covered this below in Answered Prayer.
     
  5. Saidative

    Saidative New Member

    7
    +2
    Christian
    Married

    Yeah, I actually called it "corroborative proof" up there a couple of times. I feel like that's more technically right. I maybe should've put that in the title, or something.

    This is someone else's parallel, but check it out. In revelation 4 john described the heavenly temple, it had "a throne carried by 4 angels"- the throne of the human heart has 4 chambers.-"The throne was surrounded by a crystal sea"-the pericardium membrane surrounds the heart and contains salt water. "Lightning and thunder proceeded from the throne " - your heart is powered by electricity and sounds like thunder when it beats. "Near it were the 7 lamps that were the 7 spirits of God". Your lungs contain 7 vascular bundles that carry breath to the body. "And all of it was surrounded by 24 elders dressed in white ". Your heart and lungs are surrounded by 24 white rib bones.

    So, if we're to conclude that the similarities (parallels) between the Heavenly Temple and Human Body are too exact to have happened naturally, by coincidence... then, we must conclude that it was done supernaturally. I mean, the Bible even says the body is the new Temple, now. There's a lot more of these type of parallels with the body and Temple, too.

    I mean, what do you think? Could that parallel have possibly happened naturally?

    If we know that humans don't teleport or something, and then we not only see a human teleport, but they take us on a teleport with them, so we know it's for sure legit, then wouldn't we be able to say, "this is not naturally done by humans?" Wouldn't it be a supernatural act?
     
  6. alexandriaisburning

    alexandriaisburning Well-Known Member

    670
    +192
    Christian
    Private
    This is a false conclusion. No matter how unlikely to occur an event might appear to be, the most astronomical of probabilities is greater than the probability of supernatural intervention. I don't conclude this because the supernatural *cannot* occur, nor even that it is unlikely or uncommon for it to occur. My point, as before, is that we don't know what the supernatural looks like. We don't know how likely or unlikely it is to occur, and we have no means by which to measure that it has or hasn't occurred. Just because we think we cannot explain something using "natural" explanations does not mean that the natural is ruled out and that the supernatural is the "only" explanation; it only means that we don't have enough information.

    I don't see any meaningful parallel. This kind of cherry-picking parallelism could be done with nearly an infinite number of things, as the person drawing the parallels will pick and choose the parallels to accentuate, while ignoring and glaring or damning differences.

    We might be inclined to conclude that, but there is no necessity to conclude that logically. Our knowledge of what is possible in the universe is an infinitesimally small speck on an infinitesimally small speck...so while one could jump to the conclusion of "supernatural" action, there is no actual basis for making this assumption (given that we don't know what supernatural actions look like). And we must avoid simply reducing the gaps in our knowledge to the "supernatural", since we have no means of knowing what the "supernatural" actually looks like.
     
  7. Saidative

    Saidative New Member

    7
    +2
    Christian
    Married
    Was the Virgin Mary having a Kid supernatural? If yes, than we can know what supernatural actions look like. I mean, are we saying that was natural just because it happened once? What does natural even mean? There's no way that was a natural event.
     
  8. alexandriaisburning

    alexandriaisburning Well-Known Member

    670
    +192
    Christian
    Private
    No, it can't. To the best of our current knowledge, such things do not occur. However, it may be possible in the future (given that, from the perspective of the physical laws of the universe, there is nothing impossible about it). The point is that simply because physical phenomena defy our understanding does not necessarily mean that we are witnessing something supernatural. As I already mentioned, it could just indicate that we don't know enough information about what we are seeing.

    Think about this a moment from the perspective of someone that lived 4,000 years ago. What would they think about the technologies that we take for granted today? Or even someone from the 17th century...if you showed them a smartphone, what would think was going on? The "average person" might conclude that it's magic or sorcery or "the supernatural"; but from our perspective, it's very well understood physics, electronics, etc. As I said before, we must avoid the temptation of reducing our ignorance of the physical universe to the fallback of "everything is supernatural that I don't understand". This doesn't mean that the supernatural doesn't occur; it only suggests that the supernatural should not be a "gap-filler" for ignorance.

    Probability has nothing whatsoever to do with whether an event is or isn't "supernatural". Whether or not something is "basically impossible" only means that we have a lack of understanding of the fulness of the physical processes that are occurring. As unlikely as any given physical phenomenon might appear to be from the perspective of our knowledge about the physical processes behind it, the sheer fact of it happening within the universe should lend credence to the supposition that it is, in fact, a natural phenomenon.

    This example doesn't have any corollary to what's being discussed. Whether or not a physical process seems to bear the marks of "intelligent design" has nothing to do with whether the same physical process should be considered "supernatual." Even if we assume that an intelligent design is behind the physical processes that we see, the scope of our knowledge can only reasonably presume that this intelligence is also a natural (not super-natural) one. In other words, there is nothing in the presupposition of "intelligent design" that would suggest that the origin of the design is "other-than" the universe.

    I don't doubt that you can find parallels to fit the model you're trying to prove. That is the beauty of the approach you're taking: as there is no pre-defined criteria for determining whether a "parallel" is or isn't legitimate, you can find any parallel that you like (no matter how tenuously the connection might be made). Since you are both the one establishing the rules for the parallels, as well as the one verifying that your findings match up with the rules you've concocted, you cannot fail in this quest. However, this does not by any stretch of the imagination mean that the parallels you've discovered are objectively meaningful or real.

    The disciples didn't see the resurrection! They saw an empty tomb, and the resurrected Savior. If we look at their writings, they obviously did not fully know how to articulate what they were seeing, many doubted, and many did not even recognize Jesus. I'm not disputing the miraculous nature of the resurrection; I fully affirm it. However, what I will not affirm is that the resurrection of Jesus can be historically or scientifically validated. That is, if we take the relevant physical phenomenon (the empty tomb), the most rational conclusions that we can reach is that it was empty because of some natural process (someone stealing the body, Jesus himself escaping from the tomb, etc.). I'm not suggesting that these are the explanations for the empty tomb; however, from the perspective of examining the evidence on the basis of human epistemology, even the most outlandish theory regarding the empty tomb is infinitely more "likely" than a supernatural event. I happen to believe, as a Christian, that something supernatual did occur. However, I also concede that there is fundamentally no way in which I--or anyone else--can possibly demonstrate the historical/scientific veracity of the claim. It has to be apprehended by faith alone, for miracles are not proper objects of human knowledge.

    Fair enough, but this is precisely my point! Our "knowledge" of the universe is insignificant in regard to all that can (and must) be known about it in order to have "accurate knowledge of what's natural". We tend to attribute the "supernatural" to things we cannot explain (God of the gaps...), but such attributions may simply be the result of limitations in our knowledge about the universe in its infinite variety. Until we know the sum total of all there is to know about the universe in all possible states of existence, it is simply not possible for us to rule out the "natural" when we examine physical phenomena.

    The sheer physical phenomenon of Mary having a child is certainly not remarkable. The "miraculous" nature of the birth is also not simply the fact that she is attributed as being a virgin. The real miracle that Christians celebrate and believe is that the origin of her child was a supernatural one, the incarnation of God in humanity.

    But although Christians affirm this miracle, there still remains no way to verify it or demonstrate that it happened. A physical examination of Mary and Jesus would not have produced any remarkable findings, for the miracle that occurred was not a strictly physical phenomena, but a union of God and humanity that would be beyond the limits of human thinking to examine and understand. Even in the profession of the Incarnation, Christians recognize a miracle and mystery. Such things are not objects of examination, experimentation, or repetition.
     
  9. Saidative

    Saidative New Member

    7
    +2
    Christian
    Married
    Cool. I get what you're saying, but it just kind of feels like semantics. Once again, I did use the word "corroborative" up there a couple times. Like, it doesn't prove, prove it... but goes towards proving it. But I guess the odds of probabilities don't prove anything, right? It proves it enough for people to get the death penalty, though. What do they call the evidence in court? Proof.

    I'll tell you what, Chuck Missler thinks there's evidence of supernatural activity in the Bible's writing.

    http://www.khouse.org/articles/1995/102/

    Have you ever heard of the Mathematician, Ivan Panin? He found a bunch of mathematical codes in the Bible. Those codes couldn't have been planted there by people, so how do you think they got there? The LORD is the only answer.

    http://www.biblebelievers.org.au/panin1.htm
     
  10. alexandriaisburning

    alexandriaisburning Well-Known Member

    670
    +192
    Christian
    Private
    I disagree. There is nothing being corroborated, other than the presuppositions that underlay the propositions. To show that something is "supernatural" would require that one have an established means of first identifying what is and isn't supernatural. We simply don't have such criteria. So because of the lack of such a standard, there can be nothing presented that "corroborates" the proposition, since the subject of the proposition (e.g., supernatural action) is completely unknown. Again, this doesn't mean that supernatual activity doesn't exist; I'm simply showing that we have no way of identifying it in anyway demonstrable way.

    Correct. This is true even in natural sciences, but even more when related to the proposition of identifying supernatural behavior.

    Apples and oranges. For issues of a legal nature, we allow deductive reasoning because it is based on experience, analysis, and true corroboration of other facts. With the supernatural, however, we have no experience, no way to analyze it, and no corroborating facts.

    He's entitled to his opinion. I disagree.

    From what I've read, he took pretty significant liberties with the standard Greek and Hebrew texts in order to guarantee the structures that he found. Even if we grant that his custom versions of the Greek and Hebrew texts are better than those from which he diverged, it all more or less ignores the well documented issues of textual transmission from the no-longer extant original versions to the ones that we have today.

    That is, if the integrity of this mathematical structure depends so intimately on the number of words/letters in specific passages, then it is absolutely critical that the exact structure of those passages be able to be verified and authenticated. This, of course, is not possible (it can only be approximated), so it's not surprising that Mr. Panin had to resort to his own textual reconstructions.
     
  11. Saidative

    Saidative New Member

    7
    +2
    Christian
    Married
    What about the Dead Sea Scrolls? The verses have at least been the same since those.

    Isn't saying "we have no supernatural experiences to base it on" an assumption? How do you know there's not proof of it that you haven't seen yet?

    How is Ivan Panin's Theory a 0.1 % chance to have happened by accident, and say.. a Stone Henge a 0.1% (or less) chance to have happened by accident... and neither one of those would be deemed by you to have been a supernatural occurrence, even if (key word "if") proof of no humans creating both of those phenomenas existed? And they couldn't have happened naturally. You're saying there's a better chance Ivan Panin's calculations happened naturally? But he proves that the odds are better that they didn't... with math calculations. 40,000 pages he submitted.
     
  12. alexandriaisburning

    alexandriaisburning Well-Known Member

    670
    +192
    Christian
    Private
    Huh?

    Of course it's an assumption. My point is that there is no obvious criteria by which to verify or invalidate the assumption. How does one identify supernatural actions? What are the markers that would show that something is or isn't supernatural? The very category of "supernatural" presumes that it transcends the normal categories of observation, experimentation, etc. This is why I have consistently maintained that supernatural events may certainly well occur (I personally believe they do); however, my underlying argument is that there is no way to demonstrate that they do.

    As I said before, probabilities are irrelevant. No matter how unlikely an event may appear to be (based on our limited understanding of the universe in which we live), *that* it occurs is the only important consideration. Why is this? Because if we observe a "thing", that "thing" is a proper object of human knowledge, and therefore is--for all that we are capable of deducing--"natural". Applying probabilities to past events is irrelevant, for there is no meaningful way in which to recreate the unfathomable number of conditions required to recreate the scenario. So then, the *actual* probability of any particular historical event happening is precisely 1.

    Why should it be deemed by me (or anyone else) as being a supernatural occurrence? What is the threshold for determining that something is "so unlikely" that it "must be supernatural"?

    0.1%?
    0.0001%?
    0.000000000001%?

    Do we have the requisite understanding of what is possible in the universe that we are able to make such determinations? Such an assumption would actually suggest that we are, ourselves, transcendent of the universe, whereby we might have such requisite knowledge. But of course, we aren't transcendent of the universe...we don't know the slightest thing about it (when understood in the scope of what there is to know).

    But if they exist, our only assumption (from the perspective of the evidence available to us, and the tools of epistemology to which we have access) is precisely that they DID happen naturally, regardless of how unlikely we think (without any actual demonstrable reason for doing so) it is that such a thing could happen again.

    Again, the "odds" don't matter. If that kind of mathematical structure actually does exist (and his work has not been thoroughly reviewed, or peer-reviewed), there is still no epistemological reason to conclude that this observation is one of supernatural origin. As unlikely we might consider any phenomenon to be, we do not have the requisite knowledge of the universe to positively assert that this phenomenon is impossible and must, therefore, owe its existence to a supernatural source. Once again, it may VERY WELL be of a supernatual origin; but we don't have the criteria available to demonstrate it one way or the other.
     
  13. Saidative

    Saidative New Member

    7
    +2
    Christian
    Married
    Alright, but what about the technical definition of supernatural?

    adjective: supernatural
    1.
    (of a manifestation or event) attributed to some force beyond scientific understanding or the laws of nature


    It says that it has to only not be able to be explained by current science understanding. Not possible future findings. It's stuff that science and laws can't explain. If a law doesn't exist yet, then it can't explain it to us. Therefore it doesn't explain it.

    And then there's this one:
    a : departing from what is usual or normal especially so as to appear to transcend the laws of nature

    It uses the word "appear". So it doesn't have to have been proven right throughout all time. It just has to "appear" to. You know, by not being able to be explained.

    So, for an event to be proof of what the boundaries set forth by these definitions are, it just has to be not explainable by science and the laws of nature. The onus is on science to prove it wrong. Otherwise it's deemed supernatural, because the event "proves" the technical definition of "supernatural" to be an accurate definition of said event.

    The Dead Sea Scrolls are ancient Biblical texts found about 50 years ago. They're believed to have been written back around Christ times. Probably before. The scrolls they found that were Biblical were written almost exactly like the Bible we have today. Like only 5 words were sort of off, or something. They attribute the exactness of the copies passed down to the meticulous traditions of the Rabbis who transcribed them. It's like they had to start the whole page over if they made mistakes and stuff. I commented on the Dead Sea Scrolls because you wrote this, "it all more or less ignores the well documented issues of textual transmission from the no-longer extant original versions to the ones that we have today." It's not the full Bible, though. But still...

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dead_Sea_Scrolls
    http://www.centuryone.com/25dssfacts.html
     
  14. alexandriaisburning

    alexandriaisburning Well-Known Member

    670
    +192
    Christian
    Private
    Seriously? So according to this criteria, what is supernatural today may not be supernatural tomorrow. If our own ignorance (whether collective, or individual) is the only basis for determine what is and isn't supernatural, then literally all acts that don't have "immediate" explanations should be understood as supernatural!

    Of course, you wouldn't actually go this far in the actual application, but it does demonstrate the point I've been consistently making: without established criteria for determining what is and isn't "supernatural", there is no way in which to verify or discredit any given phenomenon as "natural" or "supernatural". It will literally be left to the interpretation of the individual who will be forced to make a value judgment based on the infinitely small understanding of the universe that they might currently posses.

    This is even worse. Appearances can be deceiving; there are many well understood physical processes within the unvierse that--to the uninformed--would appear to "transcend the laws of nature" (for example, the first time you hear about quantum mechanics). However, to those who understand the laws, there is nothing transcendent occuring; quite to the contrary, the "appearance" understood as a false facade of what is actually occuring.

    That is absurd, and is only a retreat into a "god of the gaps" understanding of the universe. All that will happen, ultimately, is that the original, seemingly infinite domain of "supernatural" (here understood as "human ignorance regarding the physical universe") will shrink and shrink as we learn more and more about the universe in which we live. The "supernatural" (e.g., "ignorance") will become a smaller and smaller domain of possibility, and will eventually be relegated to meaninglessness once knowledge of the universe is exhausted. After all, once all that occurs within the universe is explained by our understanding of the universe, there remains nothing left that need be relegated to the "supernatural".

    You're missing my point. When I asked about why you were bringing these up, it was not a question about the relative agreement between the documents contained in this collection and those which were already known about. It was more in response to your suggestion that the Dead Sea Scrolls discovery somehow lends credence to the numerology of Panin. That is, "relative agreement"--even a large amount of it--is not sufficient for what his methodology required; rather, he suggested that the very number of words--even letters and characters!--displayed the "marks" that he proposed. So again, if such precision does in fact exist, then "every jot and tittle" is indeed critical and must EXACTLY match the originals if his thesis is to hold water.

    Therefore, while the DSS may have a good deal of harmony with other extant texts, there are by no means precisely identical, thus representing the issues of transmission that I already raised with ultimately doom the prospects of Panin's methodology and, I suspect, is precisely why he had to resort to creating his own versions of the biblical texts in order to make his calculations work.
     
Loading...