07-13-2005, 12:54 AM
I see, interesting!
Then according to what you have just said, that made what I commented on here before correct then, that Dave's methods in this were completely dependant upon book arrangment, and if one book was taken out of the current arrangement, the code display would completely disapear.
This could be demonstrated by the books that Luke wrote in the NT.
Anyone can say with relative boldness, that The Acts of The Apostles was written by Luke as his second book, so it would stem to reason that his second book should have followed his gospel, and it would be easy to arrange it chronologically like that.
I suppose Dave would be vehemently against that, to say the least, but it is quite reasonable to do it that way. One of the Old Syriac manuscripts was actually arranged to where it could do just that: Matthew, Mark, John, Luke,...and Acts, if it had a manuscript in that language, would have followed in that progression.
Anyways, thank you for the explanation John. I don't know if I would find time to study the word in the manner that you explained, as The Lord has more things for me to do at the moment, but the method you mentioned seems to have more thought placed in it for the individual then a numerical method, as your actually reviewing the words, structures, and symbolisms involved rather than a numerical calculation.
I hope I understood you correctly in that.
Then according to what you have just said, that made what I commented on here before correct then, that Dave's methods in this were completely dependant upon book arrangment, and if one book was taken out of the current arrangement, the code display would completely disapear.
This could be demonstrated by the books that Luke wrote in the NT.
Anyone can say with relative boldness, that The Acts of The Apostles was written by Luke as his second book, so it would stem to reason that his second book should have followed his gospel, and it would be easy to arrange it chronologically like that.
I suppose Dave would be vehemently against that, to say the least, but it is quite reasonable to do it that way. One of the Old Syriac manuscripts was actually arranged to where it could do just that: Matthew, Mark, John, Luke,...and Acts, if it had a manuscript in that language, would have followed in that progression.
Anyways, thank you for the explanation John. I don't know if I would find time to study the word in the manner that you explained, as The Lord has more things for me to do at the moment, but the method you mentioned seems to have more thought placed in it for the individual then a numerical method, as your actually reviewing the words, structures, and symbolisms involved rather than a numerical calculation.
I hope I understood you correctly in that.