Not Bible Codes

Box Aligned Texts

Unique to this work is the employment of ‘boxed aligned texts’ and NOT ‘Bible Code Grid-works’. ‘Box aligned texts’ physically resemble ‘word jumble puzzles’ found in newspapers and magazines everywhere. In this study ,however, it quickly becomes
obvious the boxed aligned texts we are viewing are much more than word jumbles. This is so primarily because they are indisputably God’s revelations. They woek as a background against which a large variety of God's ancient secrets are revealed. Moreover, the texts we are viewing allow for multiple patterns to be revealed ‘all at once’. They present ‘God’s concise dogmatic revelations’ in such a manner that the reader is stunned by their pointedness and congruence with the text being studied. This type of text arrangement is the ‘missing link’ which pulls it all together. Also, the use of box text alignment does not require any sort of a computer program.

We make no attempt to predict the future
The most important difference between this work and the Bible coders ‘findings’ has to do with the very allure touted by  Bible Codes enthusiasts themselves; namely, they promise the possibility of  predicting ALL future events by using computers to de-cipher the ELS patterns in the Bible. 

The problem with their efforts is clearly spelled out in the Old Testament[7] itself.  The Old Testament refers to ‘future telling’ as being the practice of ‘divination’; and, this practice is absolutely forbidden by God. The Hebrew word for divination is  מקסם ‘miqcam’, meaning, to practice divination or divine the future.  This word shares the same root with the word witchcraft קסם ‘qecem’., hence ‘future telling’, divination, is at it’s very root connected to the practice of ‘witchcraft’.  Concerning witches God’s word is clear:

“Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live.” Exd. 22:18.

also, “There shall not be found among you [any one] that maketh his son or his daughter to pass through the fire, [or] that useth divination, [or] an observer of times, or an enchanter, or a witch”. Deu. 18:10

Shamefully, the coders also compound their ‘sin’ by crediting God with their forbidden discoveries.   About this God is also clear:

”Have ye not seen a vain vision, and have ye not spoken a lying ‘divination’, whereas ye say, The LORD saith [it]; albeit I have not spoken”? Ezk. 13:7

“But the prophet, which shall presume to speak a word in my name, which I have not commanded him to speak…, even that prophet shall die”.  Deu. 18:20

It’s particularly sad that people who are otherwise strong in their faith have fallen so deeply into the trap of trying to use God’s Word to engage in the practice of ‘future telling’. 
Finally, the coders assert God fully intends for modern man to use the very letters of the Holy Bible to practice this sort of ‘divination’.  They fail to understand that His Holy Things, His Holy Letters and His Holy Words used this way in the performance of these forbidden activities, is a most abominable blasphemy.


Faithfulness to the Biblical context
Traditional biblical exegesis[8] demands faithfulness to the text being studied in regard to contextual relevancy.  This means, that for any and every scriptural passage studied, traditional biblical exegesis demands every comment, analogy and application which the student develops must, in some fashion, be directly relevant to the text read. If it does not relate it fails the traditional, and modern, tests for proper exegesis.  So highly developed is this concept in Jewish scholasticism that they have, over time, developed and systematized four levels of biblical exegesis with each sequential level deepening the students understanding of the relevancy, application and spiritual implications of the passage being read.  In short, every passage read can only be interpreted within some framework of congruent and contextual meaning.
The coders, however, place zero importance upon ‘relevancy’ and ‘congruency’. They use the Bible as a data base, in this case, as a massive collection of letters – one letter next to another letter.  They have little interest in context instead they look only for ELS patterns which emerge from the data base.

Their findings therefore have zero scriptural context.

In this regard the only patterns which they can locate are ELS patterns – and computers are definitely needed for this task.  Consider how difficult it would be to track down an ELS pattern having a skip sequence of say, 1142 letters  without a computer. This is an impossible task!  The ELS letters patterns with which they work can be as tightly packed as a two letter skip or as far apart as many thousands of letters between each ‘next letter’ found.  One letter can be found in Genesis the next letter in Job and perhaps the next in the minor prophets.  Relevancy and congruency to ‘a particular passage’ is impossible when the text is handled like this.  Correct Biblical exegesis demands congruency with the text. 
The revelations contained in this book are absolutely congruent with the Biblical text. It is precisely this tight and razor sharp congruency with the text that takes the revelations we discuss herein out of the realm of mere coincidence into the hard cold world of ‘factual information’. 
As I present God’s revelations to you, I will employ the ‘rabbinic method’ of exegesis, being attentive to the relevancy and congruency of the text.  I will also draw upon Christian hermeneutics[9] to expand upon these discoveries and to draw conclusions which are understandable and relevant with the context of the passage being read. 
I’d like to caution the reader, however, that regardless of the method of exegesis I use at any given time, remember the method I employ is exactly this…, it is my method.  My exegetical method  as well as my opinion can be, but hopefully is not, totally flawed. 

All that is important is the revelation itself.

The revelation stands on its own.  It is the word of God and I’d like the reader to keep this in mind as I plod along attempting to ‘exegete the impossible to exegete’, the infinitely sublime Word of our Father.
In conclusion, God’s guarded teachings, which are deeply embedded into the text, are pure revelations and should not be confused with Bible codes. God’s revelations are clear, razor sharp and relevant to the very passage being read.   
In comparison, the Bible Codes computer programs are not designed to produce findings relevant to any topic or passage in the Bible.  Also coders ‘findings’ usually require generous interpretation to be understood. Sometimes they are downright obscure. 
But, what can be said about the very few but much ballyhooed so called ‘accurate prophesies’?  We can’t say too much except, ‘beware’.  The reader will quickly see that such ‘accurate findings’ are truly of a different sort of character than are God’s revelations which are contained in this book.  They lack contextual congruency and spring forth from a spirit which desires to use the Holy Bible to predict the future.
In the work of the coders, the evil one has found a way to imitate and to twist the very word of God.  This pernicious activity is nothing new to most of us.  The evil one imitates love - offering lust instead, joy finds its imitation in pleasure and righteousness in prudery.   In the case of the Bible Codes, that feared and wretched enemy of humankind has drawn many well intentioned people into his net diverting even the people of God off  ‘the track’ - the safe pathway home to their  heavenly Father.   He has drawn them into the net of endless speculations concerning future events - thus occupying their time and preventing them from finding the true pearls contained in the scriptures most precious words.
Finally, the very intent of Bible coders, i.e., to use the letters of the Bible to predict the future, countermands the clear teachings of the Bible itself and blasphemes God and desecrates His Book.  Before being swayed by such things, one should consider that the distinguishing characteristic of a false prophet is that his prophecy fails to happen.   At this writing, hundreds of key ‘coder prophecies’ have failed; for example, the Battle of Armageddon has not happened – though often predicted, the start and end of WWIII via atomic holocaust failed many times and for many prophesized dates and Hilary Clinton being elected to the presidency of the US was clearly a non-event.[10]
In contrast, God’s revelations do not fail.  They point to real events, expounding them; clarifying their meanings. The reader will see, time after time, as each box aligned text is ‘unwrapped’, that highly recognizable teaching is being affirmed; most of which  teaching, is probably already known to the reader.
Depending if the reader is Jewish or Christian, he may or may not be challenged by what he sees revealed; but more than likely, he will not say, ‘I have never heard of such things’. You see, the revelations are not new. What the teachings say is not different - content wise - than what has been taught before. 
What is different is this, ‘the content of these revelations have previously been understood to be issues of theological debate.  But now, the debate is over, the teachings are now being clearly spelled out in the text of scripture’.  It’s like a classroom setting, the students have studied the material and have taken the test.  The teacher now reviews the test questions with the class.  Only now, the subject is God’s Own teaching i.e., Torah; and, it is HaShem[11] Who is the Teacher.
These teachings do not fail because they point to real events, real people and real doctrine.  Who can deny? They affirm that which has always been taught in all places. The revelations only leave room for a choice. 
The Choice
The reader can either accept the revelations as being inserted into the text by the Hand of God or not.  Notice, I did not say the reader can either accept them as being there on purpose or not.  There is no debate on this issue. The science of statistics probabilities has settled this question forever. 
Did God do the encryption of these teachings, overlying them across the storyline of the text?  Yes or no? 
And, if not God…,
then who…, 
and…, why?