Which is what you merely "believe". You don't know this. You can't test this. You just assume that it is the case.
One good case for my assertion is the Piso family. Look them up.
And again it comes back to what I said: why would you do that? On any other subject, you wouldn't. You'ld simply discard it and move on. You are literally saying here that the bible contains truth, period. And if the evidence shows the bible to be wrong, then we must be understanding the bible wrong, because the bible can't be wrong since you defined it that way and assume it to be correct.
Allegories and metaphors are not wrong, them are simply a smaller example of a fractal reality which has higher, invisible, self similar processes. All physical things are the results of energetic processes.
There are mathematical harmonies embedded in the text that are so complete, deviations and additions to the text become readily apparent.
Clearly this is not how one goes about differentiating truth from fiction.
A cypher is neither truth nor fiction, it is a puzzle.
I wouldn't. I wouldn't at all. Especially not if I was all-knowing, because then I would realise that at some point those people would learn about the world and realise how horribly wrong those texts are. I would realise that they wouldn't be rationally justified to hold on to stories that don't hold up to scientific scrutiny.
You would for very specific reasons. Universal truth yields universal technology. 2 possible scenarios: The previous age of man was very high tech and coming to a global war. Many legends especially the Mahaburata point to this. "War in Heaven" legends...complete loss ofglobal societal mind set. Back to tribal life. You would code the story so that it survives through a primitive culture.
2nd scenario: Mass global natural catastrophe. Most all humanity set back to stone age. You would coded the story in such a way that it survives in very primitive minds who are tied to the land and animal kingdom.
This scenario too has massive historic support.
Your argument makes no sense. And at bottom, it's again just another thing you merely
believe. It's all still part of your effort of rationalising the idea that this bronze-age text can't be incorrect.
The parts that have been added to and fudged are "incorrect".
Your word salads employing buzzwords are not interesting.
None of your claims are shaking up the scientific community. With all due respects, you are not a scientist, you have no credentials, you have no published material so what you have to say about these subject is irrelevant.
Are you unfamiliar with what cavitation means? Did you look up sono-luminescence and witness the actual mechanism so it doesn't sound so "buzz word salad" too you?
So you can only ever think a new thought or learn something from an appeal to authority?
Your pseudo-scientific ideas are no different then the ideas of those who pretend that homeopathy is a science. Or people like Deepak Chopra who do their outmost best to use the word "quantum" every other sentence, while not having any formal education or knowledge about quantum mechanics at all.
Did they also find the same dark matter and dark energy constants as modern science? Did they find out why the atom is compose of a positive nuclear point and a negative probability sphere? Do they assert why we are made of the lightest type of 3 density families of matter and why there can only ever be 3 families?
Did the solve for symmetry in matter/anti-matter production at the "big bang" without resorting to a magical amount of extra matter like modern science?
Do they say why electricity travels as a skin effect or why the photon can appear as a wave or a particle?
Do they account for infinite equal sized universes all perfectly arranged in mirror symmetric manner? Do they show how it provides for the "fine tuning" of forces to allow for life and all atomic matter to arise in all of them? Do they complete blow the "magical metaverse" model out of the water?
No, your appeals to ridicule do none of these things.
You say this as if it is a strength of the bible and as if it adds credibility. I consider it a major flaw. If two people can read that book and draw conclusions as extremely different as what we see in this world (like for example AV on the one hand and a guy like Francis Collins on the other), then I consider the book to be completely useless.
How many people are at the exact same level of mental/spiritual development at the exactly same time? How many have traveled through exactly the same spaces and experiences? People get completely different things from the same text when they are at completely different levels of experience. A good fractal cypher takes this into account when attempting to address all men for all time.
But if two people read a physics book about gravity, they won't be walking away with opposite ideas of what gravity is. That's the difference between clarity and obfuscated superstition.
And if that text unlocked access to "zero point energy" would you put it in the hands of highschoolers?
Insights that were SO NEW that you are the only one that walks away with it. And that is precisely the problem.
And how long has cosmic inflation been known about until some one finally (recently) pointed out the fact that during a certain cosmic epoch the temp of background radiation allowed for liquid water, all over the universe, for a very long time. Alters the Drake equation quite a bit don't you think?
Ah but I didn't go to school and get a degree in insights did I?
Why? What is
objectively special about the bible?
Have you studied Semotics? Here are a couple examples:
" Fear of the lord is the beginning of wisdom "
" Fear " has the gematria value of 216
The premier book of wisdom is the Book of Ecclesiastes, by Solomon.
The value of the phrase it starts with is 216 ( Vanity, all is vanity )
The phrase is repeated in the 216th verse
The number 666 is used 4 times in the Bible
When you count and add up the letters in all four verses, it is exactly 216 letters.
In 1 John 5:7, it says " For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one. "
The phrase " the holy ghost ", the Greeks assigned the radius of the Moon ( 1080 miles )
1080 gematria
The Number 1080 - The Holy Spirit
Dude.... you have no works on the origins of the universe. I'm sorry, but you don't. Not even remotely.
You have absolutely no idea what I have.
You can look at it any way you want.
So can you.
The fact of the matter is that there is nothing objectively special about the bible or any other religious text. And never in history of human kind has a religious explanation turned out to be more accurate then a scientific explanation.
Science is what leads the way and religions are playing an endless game of catch-up while pretending it already knew those
new things "all along" by using word games, reïnterpretations and quite a lot of imagination.
You need to understand that almost everything that today is seen as "metaphorical" or "not literal", at one point WAS VERY MUCH seen as being absolutely literal. Science proved it to be wrong and then suddenly it was no longer literal
but still somehow, in some way correct anyway.
To me, the entire thing looks and smells like an exercise in futility.
It certainly would at the level you are looking at.
That is patently false. Since that very belief comes from a very specific text. Remove the bible and you no longer have a single source about "christ and his kingdom".