Tuesday, January 20, 2009

Election Bible Codes

While reading at another blog, I came across some Bible Code information concerning the candidates during election 2008. One of the codes REALLY DISTURBED ME, and so I did not want to link to the website that was actually taking it upon themselves to "predict" what could possibly happen. That is not what typical Bible Code research is all about. Interpretation of the codes is generally more reliable after the fact.



I originally became interested in Bible Codes when I discovered the existence of Jesus the Messiah Codes via Grant Jeffrey's two books - "The Signature of God - Astonishing Biblical Discoveries" and "The Handwriting of God."

Today, I decided to go over to Bible Code Digest, which is (IMHO) a much more reliable source for researching Bible Codes.

There is a huge amount of information there!

First, I read the page that described both McCain and Obama - which were found prior to the election. Then, I reached a page which listed many, many more Bible code links.

Bible Code Digest

There are Christians who do not take the Bible Codes seriously. Some, in fact, claim that they are "extra-biblical" and therefore, do not qualify as being legitimate in any way. I can respect the views of those who think that way. However, many, many situations (including the terrorist attacks on 9/11) have been found in the Bible codes after the fact. Therefore, the codes are not necessarily predicting things (as in the occult), but are actually revealing what has already happened.

As an example, we could look at one of the codes listed on the Obama Code chart and see that it has already happened and is true.

The code states:



"Please, let the joyous B. Obama be wiped out - he is constructing for me many swindles."


The interpreter of the code states:



"He has an opponent who wishes to destroy him. The opponent appears to be jealous of him and accuses him of wrongdoing."


Now, we could interpret this person to be Hillary Clinton since she lost the Democratic nomination to Obama. Or, could this be a reference to the Philip J. Berg lawsuit?

So, we see that interpretation of these codes are not an exact science - mostly because of the impressions and biases of the people making the assumptions for their meaning.

Then again, there are codes that are totally unambiguous - like in the case of the 9/11/01 terrorists attacks on American soil.


Here are just a few of the codes (and accompanying interpretations) that I found quite interesting:

Startling Election Codes Surface: Part II The Barack Obama Codes

A Post-Election Look at
Pre-Election Code Findings


Note what the code authors state:



Three pre-election BCD issues presented Bible code findings about the various presidential and vice-presidential candidates.

While BCD does not believe that Bible codes can be reliably used to make predictions, it is our position that such codes typically represent expressions of well-known points-of-view. Many of these codes appear to hit that target. Check out our pre-election articles and see whether or not you agree.


On this page we find some codes that could represent negative things about Obama:



B. Obama (2.9)



B. Obama was enlightened to provide advice,
the exalted one will be compensated,
and from his might will emanate a flute.



The first phrase of the code could refer to Obama's education and preparation for the role of president. Regarding the second phrase, it would be quite a stretch to refer to any presidential candidate as the exalted one. However, Obama has been dubbed "the one" in the media (see CNN and The New York Times).

At first, we thought the last phrase, and from his might will emanate a flute, trailed off into baffling, albeit poetic, imagery, but then, we Googled "Obama flute" and discovered several references that may help our understanding of this code.

Power Line, February 16, 2008, The Return of Sister Flute

The Aspen Times, July 15, 2008, Obama: America's Rainbow Mood Ring

Barack Obama's Official Website, January 16, 2008, The Pied Piper of Truth

After looking up these references, we came away with the image of Obama's rhetoric acting upon his audiences like the music from the flute of the Pied Piper, which is actually not a very flattering reference. Here is an excerpt from the plot synopsis of the fable The Pied Piper of Hamelin from Wikipedia.

In 1284, while the town of Hamelin was suffering from a rat infestation, a man dressed in colourful garments appeared, claiming to be a rat-catcher. He promised the townsmen a solution for their problem with the rats. The townsmen in turn promised to pay him for the removal of the rats. The man accepted, and thus played a musical pipe to lure the rats with a song into the Weser River, where all of them drowned. Despite his success, the people reneged on their promise and refused to pay the rat-catcher. The man left the town angrily, but returned some time later, seeking revenge.

While the inhabitants were in church, he played his pipe again, this time attracting the children of Hamelin. One hundred and thirty boys and girls followed him out of the town, where they were lured into a cave and never seen again. Depending on the version, at most two children remained behind (one of whom was lame and could not follow quickly enough, the other one was deaf and followed the other children out of curiosity) who informed the villagers of what had happened when they came out of the church.

On the one hand, the idea of Obama being able to sway audiences with his charismatic rhetoric can be romaticized like that of the Pied Piper playing his flute to lure the rats out of town, but the latter part of the Pied Piper story raises questions of how will this charisma ultimately be used and what motivations lurk beneath the surface?


[Note: If you go to the Bible Code site, you can click on the links to the accompanying articles in the quoted text above.]

The following one is an example of what I found most disturbing at the other site that discussed some of the codes mentioning Obama.



Joe Biden was conspiring for him while saturating and exhausting. He was declining a shot [a bullet?] under a high place, and struck some monument.

The last code could perhaps be alluding to fears of a possible assassination attempt against Obama.


However, if you click on the October 29, 2008 posting about the Palin and Biden codes we read:




Joe Biden Code #2—



Joe Biden was conspiring for him while saturating and exhausting –
he was declining shot under a high place, and struck some monument.



Comments: If this code refers to the campaign, it could be referring to Biden's behavior during the campaign in a negative light. If so, it would imply that Biden's campaign as Obama's running mate is being conducted in a conspiring manner. Without more information, it is unclear what a high place and some monument are, unless perhaps they are symbols of the presidency or of Washington, D.C.



*****



Joe Biden Code #4—



You emerged in the cell near the site of Joe Biden.



Comments: Perhaps the site of Joe Biden refers to Biden's stance on different political topics or his political agenda. Since Biden has been in politics for many more years than Obama, then you emerged in the cell near the site could refer to Obama emerging on the scene having a similar political agenda as Biden's. Another possible meaning for site could refer to his website.


Some of the codes have turned out to be astonishingly accurate! Especially when we read the "Obama Table" on this page.

I find such research quite fascinating.

What do you think about these Bible codes? What do you think about the discovery of Bible Codes in general?

Hat Tip: Bible Code Digest

7 comments:

rebecca said...

I asked my pastor about this once but he said "Bible Codes" were against Christian orthodoxy. He said that the Bible is written "plain in the light for the people" and that the codes that some people find lead to "confusion" and "discord" and were not Biblically sound.

Christinewjc said...

Hi Rebecca,

Do you know which Bible Code research he was speaking about? There are two different kinds of "codes" out there.

The one that author Grant Jeffrey and the Bible Code Digest are referring to is the ELS (Equadistant Letter Sequence) method.

A book by Michael Drosnin attempted his own type of code, but was later found to be an atheist who thought that the code was placed there by aliens...or something.

What I have found about the "Jesus (Yeshua) Messiah codes, is that they do not contradict the text if the written Word of God in any way. Nor, do they "take the place" of our faith in Jesus and his revelation throughout God's Written Word .

Anyway...like I stated in my original post I know that many Christians think that they are "extra-biblical" and should not be taken seriously. I can understand them feeling that way. But the compelling empirical evidence that the Bible Code Research Society demonstrates in its findings enhances (IMHO) the fact that Christians believe that the Bible is the written Word of God. Naysayers aren't going to change their minds no matter what.

There is nothing in Bible Code research (that I can see) that disagrees with the following:

The Bible is God's Word to all mankind. It was written by human authors, under the supernatural guidance of the Holy Spirit. It is the supreme source of truth for Christian beliefs and living. Because it is inspired by God, it is truth without any mixture of error.

2 Timothy 3:16; 2 Peter 1:20, 21; 2 Timothy 1:13; Psalms 12:6; 119:105, 160; Proverbs 30:5

GMpilot said...

Bible codes, now! Hoo boy!!

What's next...eviscerating a goat and "reading" its entrails?

BTW, Drosnin's code simply showed that Jeffrey's code is too ambiguous to be considered reliable, let alone a hidden message from some supernatural being.
Others have been down that road before, and it's always a dead end.
And what sort of a God who wants to reveal himself to everyone would create a 'code' whereby only certain people would know about him? (Well, a schizophrenic God would, but we won't go there.)

Besides, in December 2012, according to the Mayans and some others, the world will end anyway--just like it did when all the computers rolled over on Jan. 1, 2000 (the infamous Y2K "bug").

What's that? The world didn't end? How about that!

Codes in clothing! Sheesh!

"Plus, look at the ties! The Bushes and Obama are wearing blue ties, and Clinton and Carter are wearing red! Hmmmm...."

This sounds a lot like the old "code" supposedly used by gay men: a colored hankie in the left pocket meant one thing, but in the right pocket it meant something else...and the color of the hankie was also supposed to be significant. You used to be perceptive as well as strident. Now you've come to this: looking for codes in old texts and men's clothing.

Your desperation becomes greater with each succeeding post, hostess. It’s tragic. I’m waiting for when you decide to choose between sacrificing a virgin or a heifer.

Christinewjc said...

GM wrote:

"And what sort of a God who wants to reveal himself to everyone would create a 'code' whereby only certain people would know about him? (Well, a schizophrenic God would, but we won't go there.)"

The text of the Bible alone is sufficient enough for people to discover God and answer the question that Jesus poses, "Who do you say that I am?"

In biblical times when Jesus physically walked the earth and ministered to the people there were plenty of mockers (like you GM) who dismissed Jesus' claims that he is God's Son who came as our Savior to die in our place on the cross at Calvary in order for all believers throughout all time to be reconciled back unto Holy God.

It is written that Jesus said, "I am the way, the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except by me." The Pharisees knew that the use of the terms "I am" was particularly significant. It was Jesus' outright claim to be God. Here was their long-awaited Messiah - God in the flesh - Immanuel. Yet they rejected him.

No one needs the Bible codes to believe in the Truth. However, they do show a mathematical form of genius within the text - particularly within the Torah.

Like I have written before, it matters not what Christian believers think of the Bible codes. What they think of God's written Word - the Bible, and God's Living Word - Jesus are what unites all born again believers in the single cause of evangelism - teaching and preaching Jesus Christ and him crucified.

GM wrote:

"You used to be perceptive as well as strident."

You claim here that I USED to be perceptive, which means you thought:

per·cep·tive (pər-sěp'tĭv) Pronunciation Key
adj.
Of or relating to perception: perceptive faculties.

Having the ability to perceive; keen in discernment.
Marked by discernment and understanding; sensitive.
per·cep'tive·ly adv., per'cep·tiv'i·ty (pûr'sěp-tĭv'ĭ-tē), per·cep'tive·ness (pər-sěp'tĭv-nĭs) n.


The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition
Copyright © 2006 by Houghton Mifflin Company.
Published by Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved.
Cite This Source
perceptive

adjective
1. of or relating to perception; "perceptive faculties"
2. having the ability to perceive or understand; keen in discernment; "a perceptive eye"; "a perceptive observation" [ant: unperceiving]


WordNet® 3.0, © 2006 by Princeton University.


You claim that I USED to be "strident," which means:

stri⋅dent   /ˈstraɪdnt/ Show Spelled Pronunciation [strahyd-nt] Show IPA Pronunciation

–adjective 1. making or having a harsh sound; grating; creaking: strident insects; strident hinges.
2. having a shrill, irritating quality or character: a strident tone in his writings.
3. Linguistics. (in distinctive feature analysis) characterized acoustically by noise of relatively high intensity, as sibilants, labiodental and uvular fricatives, and most affricates.


Origin:
1650–60; < L strīdent- (s. of strīdēns), prp. of strīdēre to make a harsh noise; see -ent
Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1)
Based on the Random House Unabridged Dictionary, © Random House, Inc. 2006.


Well then, if I was "keen in discernment" and also had "a shrill, irritating quality or character: a strident tone in his (her) writings., that must mean that you recognize the fact that through the skill of discernment afforded to me by the power of the Holy Spirit of God, I do share the truth of the Bible. However, being the nemesis that you have been over the years, you also admit to absolutely hating the way I share such revealed truth.

Yep...sounds about right!

GMpilot said...

CJW: "The text of the Bible alone is sufficient enough for people to discover God and answer the question that Jesus poses, 'Who do you say that I am?'"

Ummm...in Mark 8, Peter replies "Thou art the Christ," and Jesus replies "Tell no man that thing." (In Matthew, Jesus says more, I hear.) Next question.

"In biblical times when Jesus physically walked the earth and ministered to the people there were plenty of mockers (like you GM) who dismissed Jesus' claims that he is God's Son who came as our Savior to die in our place on the cross at Calvary in order for all believers throughout all time to be reconciled back unto Holy God."

In modern times when Jesus no longer walks the earth and ministers to the people there are plenty of mockers (like me, GM) who dismiss Jesus' claims that he is God's Son who came as our Savior to die in our place on the cross at Calvary in order for all believers throughout all time to be reconciled back unto Holy God.
Do you see the vital phrase there? "...in order for all believers... to be reconciled back unto Holy God." As I told you long ago, I do not believe. You don't respect other religions, so why are you surprised when someone doesn't respect yours? At least I'm an equal-opportunity mocker.

"It is written that Jesus said, "I am the way, the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except by me." The Pharisees knew that the use of the terms "I am" was particularly significant. It was Jesus' outright claim to be God. Here was their long-awaited Messiah - God in the flesh - Immanuel. Yet they rejected him."

Yeah. So when Jesus asked his famous question, he was already giving them the answer ("Who do you say that I AM?"), not letting them figure it out for themselves.
As for his famous declaration, there probably was some mocker who, hearing that, asked "Then what about Elijah? Did he not go to the Father without you to vouch for him?"

"Like I have written before, it matters not what Christian believers think of the Bible codes. What they think of God's written Word - the Bible, and God's Living Word - Jesus are what unites all born again believers in the single cause of evangelism - teaching and preaching Jesus Christ and him crucified."

Then why'd you waste bandwidth by repeating such tripe? Some Christian believers obviously do believe it!
By the way, what does the Bible say about colored ties--or any clothing, except that you can't mix fabrics in the loom? You didn't talk about that at all.

I see you've been hitting the dictionaries to deconstruct what I said. So now I'll return the compliment:

"Well then, if I was "keen in discernment" and also had "a shrill, irritating quality or character: a strident tone in his (her) writings., that must mean that you recognize the fact that through the skill of discernment afforded to me by the power of the Holy Spirit of God, I do share the truth of the Bible." However, being the nemesis that you have been over the years, you also admit to absolutely hating the way I share such revealed truth."

The only truth you reveal is how much you don't like people who don't believe exactly as you do.

nem-e-sis
   [nem-uh-sis]
–noun, plural -ses  /-ˌsiz/ [-seez]
1. something that a person cannot conquer, achieve, etc.: The performance test proved to be my nemesis.
2. an opponent or rival whom a person cannot best or overcome.
3. (initial capital letter) Classical Mythology: the goddess of divine retribution.
4. an agent or act of retribution or punishment.

Origin:
< L < Gk némesis lit., a dealing out, verbid of némein to dispense (justice); see -sis
Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1)

Based on the Random House Unabridged Dictionary, © Random House, Inc. 2006.

"Yep...sounds about right!"

I had no idea you thought so highly of me, hostess. I'll do my best to live up to your description!

Anonymous said...

CHUCK MISSLER - COPYIST !

Many these days are abandoning the pretribulation rapture view, and the June, 1995 article by Chuck Missler (”Byzantine Text Discovery: Ephraem the Syrian”) reveals why there is such a mutiny! First of all, the authoritative scholar that Missler cited, Dr. Paul Alexander, referred only to “Pseudo-Ephraem” and not to Ephraem the Syrian. (If an unsigned ancient manuscript resembles the real Ephraem but there is a question of authorship, they assign it to “Pseudo-Ephraem” - the word “pseudo” meaning “possibly.” For some groundless reason, Grant Jeffrey, the one who reportedly found the “discovery,” changed Dr. Alexander’s terminology! For more info on Jeffrey, Google “Wily Jeffrey.”) And Missler’s scholarship is also questionable. According to the Los Angeles Times (July 30, 1992), about one-fourth of Missler’s 1992 book “The Magog Factor” (which he co-authored with Hal Lindsey) was a daring plagiarism of Dr. Edwin Yamauchi’s 1982 book “Foes from the Northern Frontier”! Four months later Yamauchi’s publisher revealed that both Lindsey and Missler had promised to stop all publishing of their book. But in 1995 they were found publishing “The Magog Invasion” (which was either a revision or a replacement of “The Magog Factor”) - which had a substantial amount of the same plagiarism! (Dave MacPherson’s 1998 book “The Three R’s” has complete documentation on this and other pretrib scandals.) After listing “1820″ as the reported date of the birth of pretrib (he should have said “1830″), Missler sees a pretrib rapture in that Medieval writer’s phrase “taken to the Lord” and, since he evidently favors rewriting others instead of researching, is unaware that Dr. Alexander explained that this phrase really means “participate at least in some measure in beatitude” - which has reference only to doing acts of virtue on earth and not being raptured away from earth! Alexander added that the same ancient writer held to only one final second coming (and not to any prior coming) which would follow the time of Antichrist! (Readers can Google “Deceiving and Being Deceived” by MacPherson to see how groundless the Pseudo-Ephraem claim is and to learn how desperate pretribs are to find any pre-1830 evidence for their escapist view. Dr. Robert Gundry of Westmont College has also demolished the Pseudo-Ephraem claim in his 1997 book “First the Antichrist.”) Since Missler also leans on Thomas Ice, readers can evaluate Ice’s qualifications by Googling “America’s Pretrib Rapture Traffickers,” “Thomas Ice (Bloopers),” “Thomas Ice (Hired Gun),” and “Pretrib Rapture Diehards” (the latter part). For further light on the 179-year-old, fringe-British-invented pretribulation theory, Google or Yahoo “Pretrib Rapture - Hidden Facts.” Finally - why would anyone who has the brains of a rocket scientist want to be taken up with the concept of an any-moment pretrib rapture? The answer may well be that there’s more money in elevating a rapture than launching a rocket!

Anonymous said...

Hal Lindsey ties in his rapture with 2012 AD which he "sees" in the ancient Mayan calendar. This inspired historian Dave MacPherson to send the following message to Hal: "2012 may be YOUR latest date. It isn't MAYAN!" Lucinda