Biblical Hebrew Forum

[Andre Desnitsky <bsruss AT dol.ru>]

First of all, thanks to all who have responded. 
I tried the link provided by Kevin Woodruff and found it very good:
    http://www.prophezine.com/tcode/

Now, a few thoughts in response...

Dave Washburn wrote:
> 
> My question about all this is: which Hebrew text?  BHS?  Some
> other?  Was it appropriately emended based on text-critical
> principles?  Which ones?  How was the base text decided?  Who
> decided and on what principles?  How do textual variants affect
> these codes?  I have yet to see an adequate answer to these and
> similar questions.  

Neither have I seen the willingness of the supporters to admit the
very existence of those damned questions. For them, there is the
Text, namely the traditional text of the synagogue. All the variants
are nothing by deviations.

> I have no problem believing the Scriptures are
> inspired, and in fact am [flameproof suit on] an unabashed
> inerrantist.  However, I don't need stuff like this to "prove" it, nor do
> I feel threatened by textual criticism.

I am afraid I have a rather vague idea about the unabashed
interranism but all the rest sounds like I feel it myself.

Jonathan D. Safren wrote:
> 
> Dear Andre,
> The Masoretic Text, upon which the Bible codes are based, is full of
> scribal errors, and is not at all the original autograph of the Biblical
> books. Even with the aid of the Qumran MSS, the Samaritan Pentateuch,
> and ancient translations, it is nigh impossible to reconstruct any
> original Urtext. What is more, there were more than one edition of some
> biblical bookds, e.g., Jeremiah.

Jonathan, these are the facts - in our eyes. Not in theirs.
Certainly that's exactly what I preach to my own students but what
can we do about a sect that doesn't share our orthodox textual
criticism? Can we really convert them? Shall we try? ;-)

> So any "code", or nuimerology, or other prophetical or mystical
> phantasmagoria based on the Masorwetic text is pure fantasy.

I agree; but they say: the textual criticism is pure fantasy since
we have proven that our codes are no fantasy at all.

The point where I get puzzled about all that stuff was when I
realize that the claim id quite serious and that I am absolutely
unable to investigate the question by myself being absolutely
illiterate in statistics. Some experts say that's but a nonsense;
some say that's a discovery of the century - all I can do is to join
the party I like the most. You know my preferences, but how honest
it will be to ignore such a claim simply because I don't like it?

But now I think there can be an answer for a person who is not that
clever in maths. We can ask a very simple question: So what? OK,
let's admit that Auschwitz and Yitzhak Rabin were predicted in the
Bible, but these are the facts we already know. If I say: "I knew it
all before it happened", what does such a statement add to your
understanding of what has actually happened?

Do these codes say something we didn't know before? Do they shed
some light on the things we do not understand now? Where is written
the name of the next president of my country and if it is written
somewhere, will it really affect my choice at the next elections? I
think that if some guys say they now the name I will still vote for
the guy I like the most, not for the name they have read somewhere.

The same is true for the spiritual dimension of the Bible. As a
Christian, I believe the Bible is inspired by God; I believe there
are multiple levels of understanding the Scripture. Let's admit
there is another one, fixed in the Bible codes - but does it give us
anything for our spiritual life or our intellectual investigation? I
don't see any positive answer.

Andre S. Desnitsky, Ph.D.
Institute of Oriental Studies of the Russian Academy of Sciences;
Bible Society in Russia.