The Instigator
254CLM92
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
Mysfit
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points

Roe v Wade in the Bible?

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 2/17/2018 Category: Religion
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 596 times Debate No: 108171
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (1)
Votes (0)

 

254CLM92

Pro

Roe v Wade (abortion) in the Bible? The key to understanding English based Bible prophecy is to understand base number systems as it relates to the English Lanuguage.

Binary = 0 - 1
Octal = 0 - 7
Decimal = 0 - 9
Hexadecimal = 0 - 9, A - F
Base 36 = 0 - 9, A[10] - Z[35]

Base 36 encompasses the entire English Alphabet and 10 numbers.

So is Roe v Wade or abortion in the Bible (AKJV) or in Bible Prophecy?

Daniel 7:25 = time, times, and the dividing of time

(Base 36) = 0-9,A[10]-Z[35]

T[29]i[18]m[22]e[14] = 83
(2 Peter 3:8) says a day is as a thousand years and a thousand years as one day
So Time (really) = 38
Times = 76
1/2 time = 19
38+76+19 = 133

If you use only the initial for January: J = 19 in base 36

J[19]anuary 22+19+73 = 133 (Roe v Wade)

NOT a 3.5 year tribulation

But if you are really concerned about 3.5 -

98*3.5 = 343

Roe v Wade was instituted on the 22nd day of the year with 343 days remaining.

M[22]olech in base 36

(All letters for) Molech = 110 in base 36 like "white" = 110 in base 36

Hence why Margaret Sanger who founded Planned Parenthood was a "white" "molech" racist who targeted black people for abortions.

What I am also trying to say is that when it comes to the AKJV Bible - people with intelligence experience may have encoded information into this English Language Bible.
Mysfit

Con

I copied this from my comment, to save time.
The AKJV Bible was written in 1604-1611.
Base 8 number systems were first described, in European culture, 50 years later by John Wilkins. So that can be ruled out for coding purposes.
Not sure where you pulled base 36 from, but I am willing to bet that this would be even newer (just for complexity sake).
Hexadecimal goes back to the 1950s, so I think your base 36 may also refer to the coding kind. Again, would still be too new.
Decimal goes back to when we first could count, so that'd be our best bet.

Then you bring up the old criminalization of abortion (except to save a life), but i am unsure how the coding would come into that. It is in English already.

Then you refer to a small part of a quote from the AKJV bible (unsure why that one is special).
David 7:25 - And he shall speak great words against the most High, and shall wear out the saints of the most High, and think to change times and laws: and they shall be given into his hand until a time and times and the dividing of time.
Again, not sure why that bit, or more specifically, the last part is relevant to abortions. There is also no decimals apart from chapter and verse, the other kinds of numerality being excluded by age.

So, no. None of the coding systems described could have been used for that particular version of the bible.
Therefore I doubt a message hidden somewhere within or any decipherable comment on abortions (or anything) beyond the literal written word.
I hope that satisfies, whoever read all that should have a nice day.
Debate Round No. 1
254CLM92

Pro

Thank you for accepting the challenge - the AKJV Bible has undergone a number of revisions since 1611.

Base 36 in English is elementary - if the Kings of England could through mathematics build castles they could understand base 36 which =

Base 36 = 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, A[10], B [11], C[12], D[13] ... W[32], X[33], Y[34], Z35] - I tried to abbreviate the list of numbers and letters to save typing

There are also American versions of the AKJV

This is basic code stuff - and the Kings of England certainly got it - it's merely a way of assigning numbers to words and letters

For example - SD does not equal DS but they both equal 41 in base 36 - logically reversing the order of the letters changes the meaning

"Sola Fide" = 143 in base 36 - so does "obedience" but Sola Fide (by faith alone) (passive faith) is not the same as "obedience" (active faith) but they both add up to the same in base 36

Conversely - 134 logically might imply "disobedience" which actually = 202 in base 36

Base 36 merely is a way of assigning numerical values code wise to sentences, words, and letters.

Once again per 2 Peter 3:8 - T[29]i[18]m[22]e[14] actually = 38

Time = 38, Times = 76, Dividing of time = 19 = J[19]anuary 22 + 19 + 73 == Roe v Wade

We can also get into more advance topics like JESUS, LUCIFER, pregnancy, abortion, and the nature of time and money if you wish --> Google "How long pregnant" - Google links out to a UK medical site - 37 - 42 weeks

37+42 = 79 atomic number number for gold

24 - (19)73 would imply abortion 24+73=97 (fiat gold)

Au = two letter designation for Gold and = 40 in base 36 (A[10]u[30])

Time = money 100-Au = 60 minutes in an hour

JESUS = 119 - Au = 79
LUCIFER = 137 - Au = 97 (base 36 letter values)

God bless and have a great day.
Mysfit

Con

Okay, we are continuing with base 36, no worries there. I can ignore the fact that it's only 60 years old or so under the premise that smart people (not the kings) could have thought it up without writing it down.
I'm guessing your main point, as you're willing to point to other subjects, is that there could be a code hiding within the text of that bible or a future revision of it.
This falls apart as soon as someone who makes a version does not know this and inadvertently breaks the code by some paraphrasing. So, the code would have to be well known and secret. A contradiction in terms.
Again, though, I am unsure why you are picking and choosing verses for this. If there is a code, it would be in all of it. It's not logical to ignore all the other nonsense generated.
Your "For example - SD does not equal DS but they both equal 41 in base 36 - logically reversing the order of the letters changes the meaning" The letters 'S' and 'D' are present in both, and you have shown these to be equal. Yes, words formed of the same letters will have the same base 36 value, but it would not be possible to decode from there. Why would it not be a long string of '1's? It would be equal in the end, but would be nonsense. Correct nonsense.
Your code is lacking something very important, any kind of key. Every value can be obtained when translating arbitrary bits of text into base 36 then back. I can see no sense, but I can see you're using intelligence.
I like the reversal you did with the first 2 letters for gold in latin, AU, compared against JESUS and LUCIFER. Treating them as opposite values, the numbers look reversed, that is all. Using any other metal or more letters breaks this in almost every instance.
You make a lot of leaps of logic to get a point across, though. I cannot debate when there is nothing there.
The simplest way to end this would be to ask what information you believe hidden in what text, then to ask what key you used. Unless you are debating something else.
Debate Round No. 2
254CLM92

Pro

Thank you for getting back to me - here are some final thoughts on the matter:

Time, money, pregnancy, abortion, Jesus, the devil, and the English Language:

---

Terms:

Order of letters is important --> PF does not equal FP (but) they both equal 40

Google "how long pregnant" (links out to a UK Medical Site) = 37 - 42 weeks (259 - 294 days)

Base 36 in English = 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, A[10], B[11], C[12], D[13], E[14], F[15], G[16], H[17], I[18], J[19], K[20], L[21], M[22], N[23], O[24], P[25], Q[26], R[27], S[28], T[29], U[30], V[31], W[32], X[33], Y[34], Z[35]

Deuteronomy (in base 36) = 254

(Weights and measures) Deuteronomy (254) 25(P):15(F) = 294

Fiat False Economics = (False Prophet) = 249 (abortion) in base 36

(Au) Two letter chemical designation for gold = A[10]u[30]

(JESUS) = J[19]E[14]S[28]U[30]S[28] = 119

(LUCIFER) = L[21]U[30]C[12]I[18]F[15]E[14]R[27] = 137

Time = money = 100-Au(40) = 60 minutes in a hour

(JESUS) = 1:19:00 - Au(40) = 79 minutes (atomic number for gold)
(LUCIFER) = 1:37:00 - Au(40) = 97 minutes (Fiat fools gold)

Fiat money for the most part is not backed by anything and devalues with inflation over time (Weimar Republic/Zimbabwe/QE)

Biblical money is backed by gold and silver (the value is in the coin)

---

Some key dates =

1954 = Johnson 501c3 Amendment
1964 = last year for 90% silver coins (dimes, quarters, and half dollars)
January 8, 1964 = War on Poverty (welfare state)
1965 - 1970 = 40% silver half dollars only
1971 (and on) = no silver coins
August 1971 = went off Bretton Woods $35/oz gold standard
January 22, 1973 = Roe v Wade (incidentally LBJ died that day)

---

Gold and silver are finite and cannot be printed.

Fiat (paper/electronic) money can be printed into obvilion and lose value as more and more units are printed.

You cannot do a welfare state and all the associated immorality with it with a finite budget.

Does a 1971 $35/oz gold dollar still hold its value in 2018?
Mysfit

Con

We still don't have a salient point.
You are trying to use Base 36 to code language down to numbers, but you are adding these numbers and then taking away other numbers which have been picked for some arbitrary reason.
Yes, 100 - AU (in Base 36) would be 60. But 100 was gained from nowhere and your use of the atomic letters for gold because it is used in currency ignores a more widely used metal, silver (AG) or even copper (Cu). These would, by being used more, be better, but would not give you 60, which you for some reason link to minutes in the day.
You even Bolster my point "Biblical money is backed by gold and silver (the value is in the coin)" so why not silver? Silver was given to an apostle for betrayal, if memory serves. So I would have thought this metal more poignant.
None of this was obtained from the book you are trying to decode for your abortion reference. And we are still lacking any form of Key.
You do bring up some key dates, but these appear to all have links to random money events and are not referred back to. So no Key there.

I think this argument is missing what you are trying to get out of your deciphering, as I can point out the lack of a code, but if there is nothing that you pull out of the text specifically, it is hard to solidly prove
Debate Round No. 3
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by Mysfit 2 years ago
Mysfit
Struggling to get your point and which side would be Pro or Con.
But to save time, the AKJV Bible was written in 1604-1611.
Base 8 number systems were first described, in european culture, 50 years later by John Wilkins. So that can be ruled out for coding purposes.
Not sure where you pulled base 36 from, but I am willing to bet that this would be even newer (just for complexity sake).
Hexadecimal goes back to the 1950s, so I think your base 36 may also refer to the coding kind. Again, would still be too new.
Decimal goes back to when we first could count, so that'd be our best bet.

Then you bring up the old criminalization of abortion (except to save a life), but i am unsure how the coding would come into that. It is in English already.

Then you refer to a small part of a quote from the AKJV bible (unsure why that one is special).
David 7:25 - And he shall speak great words against the most High, and shall wear out the saints of the most High, and think to change times and laws: and they shall be given into his hand until a time and times and the dividing of time.
Again, not sure why that bit, or more specifically, the last part is relevant to abortions. There is also no decimals apart from chapter and verse, the other kinds of numerality being excluded by age.
You persist with base 36 though. So, i am confused.
I skipped a bit for sanity's sake. Apologies, no offense meant.

"What I am also trying to say is that when it comes to the AKJV Bible - people with intelligence experience may have encoded information into this English Language Bible."
That I can debate... and I think I have :). If you wish to base this as the point of the debate, I am happy to take Con.
No votes have been placed for this debate.

By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use.