Irony of biblical numerology - the number of books

  • Thread starter Thread starter Tinkinen
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
T

Tinkinen

Guest
I recently heard some kind of Fundamentalist talk about biblical numerology. He was displeased that there are 66 books in the (Protestant) Bible. He said that it is unlikely that there should be this number of books in the Bible, that some books are missing or divided incorrectly, because 66 is the number of disorder and confusion. I looked up a guide of biblical numerology, according to it, 66 symbolizes “the reduction or the loss of the faith to the Divine Plan, having the bad tendency of the individual initiative to want to direct that only by the intelligence and the human reason.”

On the other hand, 73 “is the number of what is completed, which forms a unit complete perfect, in which each part interacts harmoniously with the others while preserving its autonomy.”

Oh the irony.
 
Tinkinen said:
I recently heard some kind of Fundamentalist talk about biblical numerology. He was displeased that there are 66 books in the (Protestant) Bible. He said that it is unlikely that there should be this number of books in the Bible, that some books are missing or divided incorrectly, because 66 is the number of disorder and confusion. I looked up a guide of biblical numerology, according to it, 66 symbolizes “the reduction or the loss of the faith to the Divine Plan, having the bad tendency of the individual initiative to want to direct that only by the intelligence and the human reason.”

On the other hand, 73 “is the number of what is completed, which forms a unit complete perfect, in which each part interacts harmoniously with the others while preserving its autonomy.”

Oh the irony.
Click to expand...
Read John 6:66
 
Maybe this will get worked into a ‘DaVinci Code’ sequel someday.
 
There aren’t actually 66 books in the Protestant Bible anyways. Kings and Chronicles are one book. That’s why I always find this topic a bit funny.
 
dronald said:
There aren’t actually 66 books in the Protestant Bible anyways. Kings and Chronicles are one book. That’s why I always find this topic a bit funny.
Click to expand...
??:confused:

I have a NIV and a TNIV that include 1&2 Kings and 1&2 Chronicles.
 
I’m confused, i have looked at the table of contents to most of the popular versions of the Protestant bibles and they all divide 1&2 Kings and 1st & 2nd Chronicles. i guess i am not understanding what you are trying to say. I it that your version of a Bible has these four books as one long book? making the canon of your bible 36 books for the OT and 27 for the nt? I am just trying to understand what you are saying. thanks.
 
wmscott said:
I’m confused, i have looked at the table of contents to most of the popular versions of the Protestant bibles and they all divide 1&2 Kings and 1st & 2nd Chronicles. i guess i am not understanding what you are trying to say. I it that your version of a Bible has these four books as one long book? making the canon of your bible 36 books for the OT and 27 for the nt? I am just trying to understand what you are saying. thanks.
Click to expand...
It’s fine, I didn’t go into detail because I don’t believe much in superstition but here we go…

Catholics say they have 73 books in their Bible while Protestants believe they have 66, however both are incorrect. If we’re going by the authors intentions Catholics and Protestants alike both have less books in their Bible than they claim. The evidence of this is that 1 Kings and 2 Kings were really written as one book. We separate this one book because it would be extremely long if we didn’t.

For example; Psalms is 150 chapters long and like Kings, it was intended to be one long book. We could separate the first 75 chapters and call it “1 Psalms” and then call the next 75 chapters “2 Psalms.” If we did so, Protestants would be claiming that there are 67 books in their Bible but that wouldn’t be true would it? This is exactly what has been done with the book of Kings, so technically there are less than 66 books in the Protestant Bible’s and less than 73 in the Catholic Bible’s if we’re following the authors intent.

So even if this superstition about numbers in the Bible were true, then we’d have to pick different numbers, as we have separated books into two books for convenience.
 
dronald said:
It’s fine, I didn’t go into detail because I don’t believe much in superstition but here we go…

Catholics say they have 73 books in their Bible while Protestants believe they have 66, however both are incorrect. If we’re going by the authors intentions Catholics and Protestants alike both have less books in their Bible than they claim. The evidence of this is that 1 Kings and 2 Kings were really written as one book. We separate this one book because it would be extremely long if we didn’t.

For example; Psalms is 150 chapters long and like Kings, it was intended to be one long book. We could separate the first 75 chapters and call it “1 Psalms” and then call the next 75 chapters “2 Psalms.” If we did so, Protestants would be claiming that there are 67 books in their Bible but that wouldn’t be true would it? This is exactly what has been done with the book of Kings, so technically there are less than 66 books in the Protestant Bible’s and less than 73 in the Catholic Bible’s if we’re following the authors intent.

So even if this superstition about numbers in the Bible were true, then we’d have to pick different numbers, as we have separated books into two books for convenience.
Click to expand...
Where is the index of books of the Bible in the Bible? 😃
 
dronald said:
We divide those books into two separate books. They are however written as one long book.
Click to expand...
I hate to agree with a Protestant, but he is correct.
The 66 vs. 73 books arguement is silly and Catholics look silly when we claim it.
 
dronald said:
It’s fine, I didn’t go into detail because I don’t believe much in superstition but here we go…

Catholics say they have 73 books in their Bible while Protestants believe they have 66, however both are incorrect. If we’re going by the authors intentions Catholics and Protestants alike both have less books in their Bible than they claim. The evidence of this is that 1 Kings and 2 Kings were really written as one book. We separate this one book because it would be extremely long if we didn’t.

For example; Psalms is 150 chapters long and like Kings, it was intended to be one long book. We could separate the first 75 chapters and call it “1 Psalms” and then call the next 75 chapters “2 Psalms.” If we did so, Protestants would be claiming that there are 67 books in their Bible but that wouldn’t be true would it? This is exactly what has been done with the book of Kings, so technically there are less than 66 books in the Protestant Bible’s and less than 73 in the Catholic Bible’s if we’re following the authors intent.

So even if this superstition about numbers in the Bible were true, then we’d have to pick different numbers, as we have separated books into two books for convenience.
Click to expand...
Kings and Samuel were actually one book that has been subdivided into four. In the Eastern Canon they are called 1-4 Kingdoms (sometimes Reigns)
 
Tinkinen said:
I recently heard some kind of Fundamentalist talk about biblical numerology. He was displeased that there are 66 books in the (Protestant) Bible. He said that it is unlikely that there should be this number of books in the Bible, that some books are missing or divided incorrectly, because 66 is the number of disorder and confusion. I looked up a guide of biblical numerology, according to it, 66 symbolizes “the reduction or the loss of the faith to the Divine Plan, having the bad tendency of the individual initiative to want to direct that only by the intelligence and the human reason.”

On the other hand, 73 “is the number of what is completed, which forms a unit complete perfect, in which each part interacts harmoniously with the others while preserving its autonomy.”

Oh the irony.
Click to expand...
😃
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top