Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Numerically Muddy Waters
#1
Shlama,



given the interesting presence of a rather unorthodox Greek Primacist on here recently by name of Zardak, i was compelled to share a couple links that i felt might be of some clarifying worth to any who might actually be taking his (well, Panin's) numeric-fashioned 20th-century NT Greek text as holding any validity inspirationally.

i mentioned before concerning my own interest in things numerological in the past, so do understand this doesn't come from somebody who hates math! <!-- s:lol: --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/laugh.gif" alt=":lol:" title="Laugh" /><!-- s:lol: -->

simply put, there are many "limits" / "gray areas" that are a substantial aspect of the numeric / gematria landscape which need to be considered logically before too much weight is ever placed on the findings. knowing that Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek are all alpha-numeric languages, it is easy to be caught up in the "meaning" behind the numbers when there is oft-times not much substance really present. again, this said from one who has spent truly countless hours adding / subtracting / atbashing (for those who know <!-- sWink --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/wink1.gif" alt="Wink" title="Wink" /><!-- sWink --> ), etcetera, and did find from time to time what i felt were "gems," but nothing ever to the extent that the INSPIRATION of the WORD could be built upon.

ultimately that is what the issue boils down to: relying on a recently TWEAKED, MODIFIED Alexandrian text-type as the FINAL end-all manuscript of the HOLY WORD. in other words, if you aren't reading Panin's Numeric NT that he made via his "features" and "proofs," then you aren't reading the INSPIRED version. THAT is what Panin's numerics is all about. it isn't just an ancient Greek manuscript that has scribal errors here and there that we all can understand. no, it is a purportedly FLAWLESS NEW CREATION that should be rejected outright in the realm of serious NT scholarship and devoted students of the Word.

i unapologetically suggest, if you are going to read the Greek NT and trust it over the Aramaic, then PLEASE at least read something that we know to have come down through the centuries and whose lineage is at least verified, instead of a newly-designed contrived text! have some self-respect, i say!


<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.truthdefined.com/20-CritiqueOfNumerics.htm">http://www.truthdefined.com/20-CritiqueOfNumerics.htm</a><!-- m -->
this site really sheds some light on the issues i mentioned above.


<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.cai.org/faq/bible-mathematics">http://www.cai.org/faq/bible-mathematics</a><!-- m -->
this site at least tries to hold on to a possibility of merit, but is open to the problems in Panin's works


Chayim b'Moshiach,
Jeremy
Reply


Messages In This Thread
Numerically Muddy Waters - by Burning one - 01-16-2012, 04:37 AM
Re: Numerically Muddy Waters - by Stephen Silver - 01-16-2012, 04:49 AM
Re: Numerically Muddy Waters - by Burning one - 01-16-2012, 04:53 AM
Re: Numerically Muddy Waters - by Stephen Silver - 01-16-2012, 05:05 AM
Re: Numerically Muddy Waters - by Thirdwoe - 01-16-2012, 05:26 AM
Re: Numerically Muddy Waters - by Burning one - 01-16-2012, 05:56 AM

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)