The King James Bible
- Thread starter James37
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
One instance is not a pattern.
The probability is 1, because God wrote this book. It's not - and no one claims it to be - a random series of randomised character sets. You can't calculate any probability without knowing the probability distribution function. That's #1 rule. I'm waiting for you to start describing a distribution, and a structured method of analysis. I'm not seeing you applying any such things, and that's why what you're doing is not able to answer a question like why 153 fish or why 7 signs or why the third day.
So far anyhow. I'm pushing you.
The probability is 1, because God wrote this book. It's not - and no one claims it to be - a random series of randomised character sets. You can't calculate any probability without knowing the probability distribution function. That's #1 rule. I'm waiting for you to start describing a distribution, and a structured method of analysis. I'm not seeing you applying any such things, and that's why what you're doing is not able to answer a question like why 153 fish or why 7 signs or why the third day.
So far anyhow. I'm pushing you.
I attempted to start a conversation and dialogue with you concerning the number 153 and it went south quick. I have researched this number and have several observations I may share in the near future but I certainly am not prepared at the moment to present them in this forum to be trampled upon. (Matthew 7:6)
Why don't you share what God has shown you concerning the number 153?
Why don't you share what God has shown you concerning the number 153?
when Jesus awakens us to His Holy Morals, obedience, requirements that we truly belong to Him,
through our Holy calling, and just what our duties are to confirm/acknowledge our
thankful Love and gratitude to Him, His Gracious, Holy Sacrifice, we are, in essence,
acknowledging our only Hope of salvations to live/abide with Him for Eternity,
through our acceptance/acknowledgment of His Holy Sacrifice for mankind,
even without our ability to understand the Love of His most profound Spiritual' Love for us...
through our Holy calling, and just what our duties are to confirm/acknowledge our
thankful Love and gratitude to Him, His Gracious, Holy Sacrifice, we are, in essence,
acknowledging our only Hope of salvations to live/abide with Him for Eternity,
through our acceptance/acknowledgment of His Holy Sacrifice for mankind,
even without our ability to understand the Love of His most profound Spiritual' Love for us...
Last edited:
If I knew the absolute truth concerning the number I would have shared it without hesitation. I would like to spend more time researching it but unfortunately I have had to spend quite a bit of time defending what I have posted here. I certainly am open to sharing thoughts and ideas but there must be some mutual respect.
Such a simple thing...they caught 153 fish.....end of story...no subliminal messages, grand meaning, spiritually deep significance...........that was just the number that that caught.....this whole concept of proving the king jimmy is the only English bible bearing the work of God by some random numbering expirement as at best nothing more than a whim.......it contains copied verses, transliterated words, gramatically errors and words mistranslated....GOD would not inspire a work with the amount of rigmarole seen in the above..
Last edited:
It is a number that is contained in the word of God in Hebrew, Greek, English or any other language that the Bible is translated into, therefore I know it has significance.
[FONT="]"Let no man deceive himself. If any man among you seemeth to be wise in this world, let him become a fool, that he may be wise.” (1 Corinthians 3:18)[/FONT]
[FONT="]"Let no man deceive himself. If any man among you seemeth to be wise in this world, let him become a fool, that he may be wise.” (1 Corinthians 3:18)[/FONT]
We discover something quite interesting when we look at how many people, in the Gospel accounts, Jesus personally blessed.
The book of Mark records Christ, on a total of three occasions, personally blessed three people. These events were the healing of a man with an unclean spirit (Mark 1:23), healing a man who was deaf (Mark 7:32) and making whole another who was blind (Mark 8:22). Matthew, however, writes that on 23 occasions Jesus blessed a total of 47 people. Some of those whom he bestowed God's grace to include a leper (Matthew 8:2), a non-Israelite woman and her daughter (Matthew 15:22), Mary Magdalene (Matthew 27:56) and Joseph of Arimathaea (Matthew 27:57).
Luke writes that on 14 occasions 94 people were blessed. They include the seventy disciples sent out to preach and heal (Luke 10:1), ten lepers cleansed at the same time (Luke 17:12) and Zaccheus (Luke 19:2). Lastly, the apostle John bears record of 8 incidents where 9 people were helped by Jesus. Nicodemus (John 3:1), the woman accused of adultery (John 8:11) and Lazarus (John 11) are among those personally touched by the Savior of mankind.
All told, the Lord directly blessed a grand total of 153 people in 48 separate incidents!
I can be very direct and tactless, sorry. I'm not calling you nuts or saying there are no patterns in scripture though - i've been saying that it's in the Hebrew and Greek that we should be looking if we're looking for those, that they're not useful if they can't be interpreted and understood, and that to comprehend them in a useful way we should find and apply analytical, deliberate methods and justify all those methods starting from first principles. Im pushing you towards what I think is a better way. Sorry if I'm blunt just assume I'm an ordinary mathematician - you know, abstract, systematic personality with 0 or < 0 people skills
