RE: Evidence of the Bible's Validity
June 7, 2014 at 2:56 pm
(This post was last modified: June 7, 2014 at 4:34 pm by Angrboda.)
(June 5, 2014 at 6:19 pm)JimmyNeutron Wrote: POINT 1#: The Bible contains various prophecies. If a sufficient number of these prophecies is true, than it is very likely that these prophecies are what they claim to be. Some kind of supernatural or divine revelation. Either that or they are a highly unlikely and EXTREMELY lucky guess. Can we agree on this first point?
(June 5, 2014 at 7:54 pm)JimmyNeutron Wrote: This one is kinda complicated, so here goes:
The Book of Revelation was written around the year 95 A.D. You can read up on that HERE.
In Revelation 17 an angel is explaining the vision of John. He speaks about seven hills, saying "They are seven Kings; five have fallen, one is, the other has not yet come; and when he comes, he must remain a little while." This verse is translated various ways, all to the effect that the 7th king must reign for a short time.
So he's saying that there are seven kings that all have something in common, that make them all part of this set of seven. It then says that the beast is the eighth and is of the seven. So the antichrist shares this same commonality with the seven kings. It is widely accepted that the antichrist is likely to be descended from the Romans, specifically the Holy Roman Empire. Here is a big reason why:
So, his name matches the other 7 kings (Charles)
His name adds up to 666 in English, Hebrew and Greek
The name "Charles" means "Manly" ("It is the number of a MAN")
What are your thoughts thus far? I am completely open for alternative explanation.
First of all, as noted, it's not a valid prophecy until it's fulfilled. Regardless of what you think of Charles, it's yet to be demonstrated that he is the anti-Christ, and until you do, this is just interesting doodling with numbers.
However, even if I grant all your observations, there are firm mathematical reasons why this would not count as prophecy, and it has to do with what is known in mathematics as Ramsey theory, but more on that later.
Basically, when we speak of prophecy being fulfilled we are referring to a pattern or specification, say, "a king named Horatio III will die on a Wednesday," being found in a set of data (in this case, the data set of king's named Horatio III). Now it's well known that if the pattern or specification is vague, finding a "hit" is not particularly impressive. This is one well known way an "apparent prophecy" may be nothing but.
What's not as clear is that vagueness in what data is to be searched for the pattern can also weaken the value of the prophecy.
Why this is the case has to do with the work of a mathematician named Frank P. Ramsey and a branch of mathematics named after him, Ramsey theory. The basics of Ramsey theory illustrate that if you look within a large set of data, you are bound to find patterns; the larger the data set, the more interesting patterns you will find. An example already given is if you flip a coin ten times, the odds of it coming up heads each of the ten times is small. However, if you repeat the ten coin tosses one thousand times, the odds of one set of ten tosses all being heads is actually fairly high. This is the general rule: more data = more patterns.
So how does this relate to Prince Charles and Rome? Note that both the name and its relationship to Rome are both arbitrary choices: neither is in the original prophecy. So the data sets chosen have been picked arbitrarily. They could have been chosen differently, say to refer to leaders with classical names or people born in the 20th century. Neither choice is less arbitrary than the other. So the data sets which you could have searched for the pattern or specification '666' in is essentially unlimited, as you could have chosen anything as the further specification of the pattern.
And here is where Ramsey comes in. Because the data sets to be searched for the pattern is vague, the data within which you might have found the pattern and claimed victory is essentially unbounded; if you didn't find the pattern in one set of data, there's nothing stopping you from picking a different set of data to search. That makes your data set essentially infinite. Remember the general rule? More data = more patterns. If the data is essentially infinite, then according to Ramsey theory, a "hit" is basically guaranteed to be true, by virtue of the arbitrariness of the data searched.
So if finding a hit in the way you did is supposed to be significant prophecy, but finding a hit is guaranteed, then it's not prophecy, because finding the pattern in an arbitrarily selected data set is guaranteed, there's no chance of failure and therefore no foretelling.
So, Prince Charles and '666' = not prophecy but an illusion caused by the way you conducted your search.