From: Michael Roberts (email@example.com)
Date: Fri May 02 2003 - 08:00:52 EDT
I simply cannot understand what you are saying below and the sequence of
numbers is unintelligible.
In fact what you have done is to demonstrate that the bible is probably
allegory as CKBarrett argues. See below on the 153.
Vernon your arguments boomerang against the Bible. This is my concern.
> Among the clear certainties of life we may observe the following:
> Taking any multiple of 3 (as normally expressed as a denary, or base-10,
> object) and summing the cubes of its digits - repeating the process as
> times as may be necessary to obtain a final stable outcome - we find that
> outcome invariably to be 153 - the 17th triangular number. Here are two
> examples which demonstrate the principle:
> 3 -> 27 (ie 3^3) -> 351 (ie 2^3 + 7^3) -> 153 -> 153 ...
> 1624623 -> 540 -> 189 -> 1242 -> 81 -> 513 -> 153 ...
> In other words, this simple digit transform converts one third of all
> natural numbers (as normally represented) to the number of fishes caught
> Peter and his companions. Observe the significance of 3 in Jn.21: this was
> the 3rd time Jesus had appeared to the disciples since his resurrection;
> questions Peter 3 times; 153 has 3 digits.
> The number of disciples involved in the event was 7 - another number
> a clear biblical significance..
> John, along with Peter, had earlier been judged by the Sanhedrin to be
> "unlearned and ignorant men" (Acts 4:13). Clearly therefore John's
> the detail, "153 fishes...yet was not the net broken",
> in the last chapter of his gospel is as mysterious as his building an
> accurate value of the universal constant 'e' into the numerics of his
What do you mean?
> These matters provide tangible, and in my view, conclusive evidence that
> real Author of the gospel that carries his name was not John, but the
> And that should encourages one to believe the whole Book to be God's word
> man - and hence essentially immune to the depredations of the higher
> and others.
So much for that . Dealing with the 153 the NT scholar CKBarrett in his
commentary says (p484) This observation increases the probability that other
features of the story (in ch21) shouild be taken allegorically.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Fri May 02 2003 - 08:08:28 EDT