(Also see the article: Does the Bible Have a Hidden Code?)
The book entitled Theomatics attempts to prove certain unscriptural traditions of Christendom by assigning numbers to each letter in the New Testament (NT) Greek alphabet.* By adding up those "numbers" in various words, phrases, and passages found in the NT Greek text, and by manipulating those sums we can come up with an overall "theme" for them based on a predetermined Theomatics interpretation for that number. This "inspired" number was supposedly hidden in the various words, phrases, verses, and passages by God Himself for our further enlightenment concerning the Word of God, according to Theomatics.
"Theo" (refers to "God") and "matics" (referring to "mathematics") gives us "Theomatics" or "God-given numbers" or "Theology of Numbers."
Here are the Greek letters with their alleged corresponding "number value":
a = 1 b = 2 g = 3 d = 4 e = 5 z= 7 h = 8 q = 9 i = 10 k = 20 l = 30 m = 40 n = 50 x = 60 o = 70 p = 80 r = 100 s, V = 200 t = 300 u = 400 f = 500 c = 600 y = 700 w = 800. ("koppa" [= 90] and "vau" [= 6] are ancient Greek "letters" that were no longer used at the time the New Testament was written.)
So if we analyzed, for example, the word "Satan" in NT Greek (SatanaV), we would find a total number of 753 for that word: S200 + a1 + t300 + a1 + n50 + a1 + V200 = 753.
According to Theomatics, the inspired number total which represents Jesus is 111. Therefore, any multiple of that number (plus or minus 2) found in a significant word, phrase, or passage of the NT Greek text would actually represent or refer to JESUS.
So, since the sum of numbers for all of Matt. 1:20 has a multiple of 111 (± 2), it "theomatically" refers to Jesus. And we can see that it does refer to the birth of Jesus.
Therefore, if you found that the sum of 111, or a multiple of 111, (± 2) appeared in a significant word, or phrase, or passage devoted entirely to God, you could see the "hidden," "inspired" message that Jesus IS God!
To help "fit" the sums of various phrases, verses, etc. to the "meaning" the trinitarian authors desire, they have concocted a number of "fudge" factors.
(1) If the number that "should" be there can't be worked out, then: "we don't understand it properly. The numbers help us to see the correct understanding." So, even if we don't understand it, "Theomatics" "must" be right anyway!
(2) Different NT texts exist (and thousands of slight variations in different manuscripts.) If you can't get the meaning you want from one, try another. I used the Westcott and Hort text.
(3) You may use or not use (as needed to get the desired numbers): articles ("the"), conjunctions ("and," "for," "but"), and different case usages.
(4) Verse numbers (verse divisions) are arbitrary, relatively recent additions by uninspired men (so you can make one verse or phrase lap over into another by varying amounts until you get what you are looking for.
(5) Your number total may miss by 4 digits: e.g., 100 may "equal" 100 (hit); 99 (-1); 98 (-2); 101 (+1); or 102 (+2). These are all on target according to Theomatics.
(6) "Multiples" - The "hidden meaning" of your number is to be understood even if it is a multiple combination: e.g., 20 = 40 (20x2); 60 (20x3); 80 (20x4); etc. AND with fudge factor #5 above, the "hidden meaning" of the number 20, for example, is also to be understood for the numbers 18, 19, 20, 21, 22 (20 ±2); 38, 39, 40, 41, 42 (20x2 ±2); 58, 59, 60, 61, 62 (20x3 ±2); etc.
(7) You may use the whole verse (and see #4), or a sentence, or even a phrase or a significant word within that verse. And you may actually rearrange the word order within that verse to fit your preconceived number goal! (p. 41)
(8) And Theomatics, in spite of all the fudge factors it had available, was still unable to make some passages and words fit the preconceived conclusion and, therefore, had to simply ignore them and refer only to the ones that did "fit."
(9) And, of course, if you don't like the obvious interpretation based on a theomatics meaning for a certain passage, you have great "interpretational" freedom to twist it around in infinite ways to make it fit the meaning you want to find. For example, if the number for SATAN were found to be "hidden" in Jn 3:16, a theomatist would simply rationalize an explanation that fit his preconceived beliefs: "It was because of Satan's terrible disobedience that God had to send His Son to be sacrificed in behalf of mankind." Or, "If we are to truly believe and receive eternal life, we must completely resist Satan and his influence."
Given all the above fudge factors a determined person can "prove" just about anything he desires by "Theomatics."
For example, Theomatics tells us that 276 is the number for Satan. So if we choose the following scriptures, we have "proof" that the subject of them (God or Jesus) is "really" Satan:
Jn 1:1b, c - "and the word was with _ god and god was the word" - 276x7.
Jn 3:16 - whole verse minus 3 articles (ton): "for god so loved the world that he gave his only begotten son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life" - 276x45.
1 Jn 4:9 - "god sent forth his only-begotten son into the world" - 276x14.
Rev. 1:5 - The entire verse (minus 2 conjunctions [kai] and 2 articles [twn]): "from jesus christ, the faithful witness, the firstborn from _ dead, _ the ruler of _ kings of the earth" - 276x40.
Rev. 3:7 - Entire verse (minus all articles, including tade): "And to the angel of the church in philadelphia write: `the words of the holy one, the true one, who has the key of david, who opens and no one shall shut, who shuts and no one opens'" - 276x40.
All the above are direct "hits." When we include the ±2 fudge factor, we also have:
Matt. 1:23 - "and they will call _ _ him immanuel" - 276x10 (±2).
Jn 1:1 - "In beginning was the word, _ the word was with the god, and god was the word" - 276x13 (±2).
Jn 11:27 - "I believe that you are the christ, the son of _ god, the one coming" - 276x25 (±1).
Jn 20:31 - "_ these are written that you may believe that jesus is the christ, the son of _ god, _ that believing you may have life in his name." - 276x49 (±2). (Minus "but," "the," "and").
Jn 20:31 - "_ these are written that you may believe that jesus is the christ, the son of _ god, _ that believing you may have life in his _ name." - 276x45 (±2). (Minus "but," "the," "and," "the").
2 Pet. 1:16 - "the power and coming of _ jesus christ" - 276x14 (±2).
2 Pet. 1:17 - Entire verse - 276x60 (±2).
Rev. 1:8 - "I am the alpha and the omega says the lord _ god, the one who is, and who was and _ is coming, the almighty" - 276x30 (±2).
Rev. 1:17 - "and he laid his right hand upon me and said: `do not be fearful. I am _ first and _ last." - 276x28 (±2).
Rev. 3:7 - "these are the things he says who is holy, who is true, who has the key of david, who opens so that no one will shut, and shuts so that no one opens." - 276x27 (±1).
Rev. 4:11 - "thou art worthy, o lord, to receive the glory and _ honor, and _ power: for thou hast created all things, _ for thy pleasure they are and were created." - 276x31 (±1).
Rev. 22:13 - "alpha and the omega, the first and the last" - 276x17 (±2). So Theomatics can "prove" that Satan is God (and Jesus)! Doesn't this prove that Theomatics is nonsense?
Just to show that this is no accident, let's examine the number 111 (the number for Jesus according to Theomatics). Here are, according to Theomatics, six of "the seven most outstanding" references to Satan (pp. 314-315):
(1) Mt 13:38 - "the evil one" (ponhrou) - 111x7.
(2) Jn 8:44 - "he is a liar, and the father of it" - 111x37 (±1).
(3) Eph 2:2 - "prince of _ power of _ air" (minus 3 articles) - 111x22 (±2).
(4) 1 Jn 5:19 - "the evil one" (ponhrw) - 111x10.
(5) Rev. 12:10 - "accuser of the brethren" - 111x34 (±2).
(6) Rev. 13:4 - "dragon" (drakonti) = 111x5.
(The 7th "most outstanding" title reference to Satan according to Theomatics is Rev. 9:11.)
In addition we find:
Luke 22:3 - "then satan entered into judas _ _ iscariot" (minus ton and kaloumenon ["called"]) - 111x30 (±2).
Jn 12:31 - "ruler of this world" - 111x42 (±1).
Jn 16:11 - "ruler of this world" - 111x42 (±1).
1 Cor. 7:5 - "but then come together again, lest satan tempt you through lack of self control" (minus the three articles) - 111x43 (±1).
2 Cor. 2:11 - "lest satan should get an advantage of us: for we are not ignorant of his devices."
- 111x60 (±1).
2 Cor. 2:11 - "satan" (Satana) - 111x5 (±2).
2 Thess. 2:9-10 (minus tou, kai, kai) - 111x71.
2 Thess. 2:9 - "satan" (Satana) - 111x5 (±2).
1 Tim. 5:15 - "satan" (Satana) - 111x5 (±2).
Rev. 2:9 - "blasphemy by those who say they are jews and yet are not but are a synagogue of satan" (minus a conjunction [kai] and two articles [thn and twn]) - 111x76 (±2).
Rev. 2:9 - "satan" - 111x5 (±2).
Rev. 20:2 - "the dragon, the original _ serpent who is the devil, _ satan" - 111x43.
Rev. 20:2 - "the dragon, _ serpent, devil, _ satan" - 111x26.
Rev. 20:7, 8 - " _ satan shall be loosed out of his prison, _ shall go out to deceive the nations which are in the four quarters of the earth, gog and magog, to gather them together to battle" (minus 1 article [o and 1 conjunction [kai] ) - 111x137.
Rev. 13:18 - "Here is wisdom. Let _ him that hath understanding count the number of _ [the] beast: for it is the number of a man; _ his _ number is 666" (minus 3 articles ["the"] and 1 conjunction ["and"]). - 111x124 (±1).
Equally important (at least) for this last scripture is the "theomatics" statement concerning the actual number used by the inspired Bible writers: 666. This is obviously 111x6. What a disgusting statement! Who or what do you think is the source of such a blasphemous "revelation" concerning Jesus? Does Theomatics really give us an inspired understanding of the Bible?
Many years after I wrote the above, another Bible "code" became popular using a computer software program. To see a debunking of this (as above) go to http://cs.anu.edu.au/~bdm/dilugim/moby.html
It includes the fllowing and much more:
"The following challenge was made by Michael Drosnin [the person pushing this particular Bible "Code"]:
When my critics find a message about the assassination of a prime minister encrypted in Moby Dick, I'll believe them.
(Newsweek, Jun 9, 1997)
(Newsweek, Jun 9, 1997)
Note that English with the vowels included is far less flexible than Hebrew when it comes to making letters into words. Nevertheless, without further ado, we present our answer to Mr. Drosnin's challenge.
Prime Minister Indira Gandhi Assassinated on Oct. 31, 1984.
O R W I T H A W H I T E P
N A H A B Y O U N G M A N
K L E S H I S G R A N D D
D S Y E T I N G E N E R A
T H E B L OOD YD E E D
E R MWH AL E S H E A D
T T O I M POS S I B L E
* This is similar to certain attempts to prove various things by equally specious methods in the KJV. For example, some "scholars" will tell you that Shakespeare actually translated the KJV (or at least some portion of it). Among their "evidence" they often refer to the 46th Psalm. If you count forward from the first word in the 46th Psalm (in the KJV), you will find that the 46th word is "shake." And if you count backward from the last word in the 46th Psalm (in the KJV), you will find the 46th word is "spear." This couldn't possibly be a coincidence say these "experts." It could only be that Shakespeare himself encoded his name within his own work.
This "evidence" is even better than that used in Theomatics since there are no obvious fudge factors as there are in Theomatics. However, given the huge number of words and verses to be found in the Bible, it should not be surprising that somewhere in it there should be an interesting relationship between the words "shake" and "spear" or many other commonly used words. We could go ahead and find many other such relationships for other persons and things "encoded" in the Bible which would show the uselessness of such an approach to Bible understanding. Instead of expending so much time and energy on such a project, let's just use some elementary investigation.
Since William Shakespeare lived from 1564 to 1615, it is conceivable that, somehow, he encoded his own name in the 46th Psalm of the KJV Bible which was written in 1611.
However, the translators of the KJV actually copied much of their work from earlier English translations. The 46th Psalm, for example, also had "shake" and "spear" in the same places in the English translation by Wycliffe 225 years earlier! It is obvious from a proper, and obvious, examination that Shakespeare did not encode his name in the 46th Psalm. The words used by Bible code experts to "prove" such a thing were there hundreds of years before he was even born!