There has been great progress in the field of Bible coding. With each new advancement in software and coding techniques, critics have done their best to discount the validity and importance of these gains. Often times these critics have been correct in their challenges; but as techniques and software become more complicated, so then is the task of the critic more complicated.
I heard one critic say that CodeFinder: Millennium Edition software
“. . . has advanced to the point that you can get it to
say anything that you want it to.” How did I answer that
person? I told him, “Yes, but that only forces the serious
coder to look deeper into the codes – into matrix construction,
and things such as parallel terms and three dimensional coding.”
With faster computers and increases in the speed of coding software,
finds that would have been significant before are now commonplace.
New innovations in evaluating results that have been made by
Dr. Haralick (webmaster note: chairman
of the International Torah Codes Society) and others have
portrayed results in a more realistic light. As a result of
these improvements, a new eye has been trained on the codes –
an eye that uses the new technologies in an effort to sort out
the truth from the fiction as they relate to the Bible codes.
The Hebrew language lends itself to the codes. What I mean
by this is that in a vowel-less language – and one where
there are many root words and many ways to articulate a thought
– any block of script continuum will have a myriad of messages.
The question then arises, “how do you know which thought
phrases relate to which others?” Mostly folks just do this
by intuition. They create an array, and then relate the thought
phrases that they CHOOSE with other thought phrases that THEY
HAVE CHOSEN. Well . . . that is, I suppose, the easiest way.
But certainly, another can come after you, take the same block
of characters, and make it say WHAT THEY WANT IT TO. And then
the critics come along and say, “ . . . you can get it to
say anything that you want it to.” Well . . . maybe they’re
right.
I just got off the phone with Roy (your website host). He and
I share a lot of ideas about the codes and are both interested
in the relationship of parallel terms in an array. He said,
“Hey, Walt, maybe you should do a little article on parallel
terms; you can use that Pleiades matrix.” After I got his
assurance that he would print the article as is (no censorship),
I agreed.
Lately I have been coding the precepts of the Book of Revelation.
The array that is included is part of a larger matrix. It is
a low-skipper; but I do a lot of high skip stuff (wrapped Torah)[webmaster note: a toroidal search text];
and I believe that the +100K matrixes are just as valid (in the
Torah) as is the low skip stuff. I didn’t include any +
one terms, but I believe that they can be important in an array
– especially if it is a term or phrase that is used once
or seldom. Also, + one terms do not have to have the same word
breaks or meaning as does the open text.
In the matrix report below, the parallel terms are listed.
Parallel 1 is the second from the right and is the main term.
It relates to it’s parallel (term 2). Each parallel forms
a related phrase that can be joined. The same goes for parallel
terms 3 and 4. They form related phrases that can be joined.
I included one term that was related to the second parallel
pair. It is at -2 and shares a resh with Caesar. [webmaster
note: scroll to the right in the matrix below to see the parallel
term]
The
picture on the left is a model, simulating what Walter may or
may not look like. (a joke). Since Walter and I have never met
in person, I don't know what he really looks like. :-)