Providence and coincidence

  • Thread starter Thread starter Michael1801
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
M

Michael1801

Guest
Is it theologically correct to say (as many believers do) that there are no coincidences?

Years ago, someone did a computer analysis of the book of Genesis, and found that if you start with the first taw (the Hebrew letter with a “t” sound), and count every 50th letter, the text of Genesis spells out the word Torah (which is what the Jews call the first five books of the Bible–Genesis, Exodus, Numbers, Leviticus, and Deuteronomy.)

He found some other interesting things, and published a book called the Bible codes, and it led to quiet a sensation for awhile.

It wasn’t long before some Evangelical Christians were using the Bible codes method to prove that Jesus was the Messiah, and it looked like they had.

They applied the same methods the original author used on Genesis to other Biblical books, and found embedded messages clearly saying that Jesus is the Messiah.

They were called “the Yeshia codes,” and there were books written about them.

But the excitement died down, and Christian missionaries in Israel stopped using the codes to try and convert Jews living in Israel, when an Orthodox Rabbi in Israel found what seemed to be embedded codes saying that Jesus was a false prophet

Then there’s the number 666.

A lot of people thought Bill Clinton was the Antichrist at one time because “William Jefferson Clinton” adds up to 666 in both Hebrew and Greek (even though the alphabets and numbering systems are different.)

But while he’s certainly no paragon of virtue, he’s not president any more.

And he can’t run again.

And he doesn’t appear to be the Antichrist.

And Ronald Reagan also had a connection to 666.

The winning lottery number in Maryland the day he was elected was 666.

And he had six letters in each of his names–Ronald Wilson Reagan.

And the lottery thing gives him something in common with a junior state senator from Illinois, because the Illinois State lottery pick 3 number was 666 the day after Barrack Obama was elected president.

So my question is whether any or all of these things could be coincidences?

And what that word means if you believe in a God who knows all, and sees the future?

Are Providence and coincidence mutually exclusive?

Or is there some definition of “coincidence” that might still be meaningful for a believer?
 
Last edited:
Thank you Benedictinehopeful.

From your user name, I take it that you believe in God, and that your concept of God is similar to mine (i.e. all-knowing and above time.)

Do you believe the word “coincidence” can be used in a way that has meaning for you and me, or is it a word that should only be used by atheists (and could only have meaning for them)?

I mean, (in your judgement) does the word necessarily imply a godless universe, where things just happen by accident–or is there some sense in which it could be used by people who believe in the God we do?

And could some of these things (rightly) be called coincidences?

And whatever you call them, would such things have to exist for some reason?

Even in a world with God on His throne?

Please reply.
 
Last edited:
I think that there are not coincidences in the sense of related things but there are things that are unrelated that just happen to look alike. So if I say move to a new city then meet a holy person there who guides me to faith in Jesus, I would say that is not a coincidence. However, if say the number of babies born in a city equals the number of birds that died that day, I think that’s just totally unrelated. People are very good at identifying patterns where they don’t really exist.
 
This is evidence of freedom - the freedom to crunch numbers that have no tangible application to our lives. The freedom to waste irreplaceable moments of one’s finite life on earth.

Actually, if you count to 1000, you will also arrive at 666. Since 1000 contains 666, is 1000 the antichrist?
 
Well we know nothing can happen without God’s consent.

This is how I tend to view the world. But if certain things are related or not…we don’t really know.
 
Benedictinehopeful: When you say “just happen to look alike” wouldn’t that be one way of defining a coincidence?

Couldn’t “a coincidence” be defined as two unrelated things that just happen to look alike?

Are there maybe coincidences in that sense?

And might that be a useful definition?

And do there have to be such things?

As someone else just pointed out, you can’t get to a thousand without passing 666.

Would there have to be multiple coincidences (in the above sense) in any possible world God willed to exist?

And could you give me some examples?

And did Aquinas say anything that might be relevant.

I remember a Thomist I highly respect using a lot of words I didn’t understand once, and he’s in Australia now.

I think he was talking about efficient causes, and secondary causes, and the difference between what God wills "per sey’ and what He wills in some other sense, but he lost me somewhere, and I can’t talk to him right now–but I do remember that he seemed to believe that there was a sense in which coincidences exist, and terms had something to do with it.

Do they mean anything to you?
 
Last edited:
I’ll just say it depends on whether you’re looking at something as God or as a rational animal in the natural order of things.
 
Wesrock said:
I’ll just say it depends on whether you’re looking at something as God or as a rational animal in the natural order of things.
Click to expand...
OK: Let’s take ex President Ronald Reagan’s connection to the number of the beast–and here’s another dimension to that that I’d forgotten.

According to Wikipedia (Number of the Beast):
“In 1989, Nancy and Ronald Reagan, when moving to their home in the Bel-Air section of Los Angeles after the 1988 election, had its address—666 St. Cloud Road—changed to 668 St. Cloud Road.”

BYW: I’m using the Reagan example because I voted for him, and he’s dead, and I believe he was the beast–but let’s recap the ways in which his personal details intersect with the the number 666

He had six letters in each of his three names (and in our numbering system, the third column from the right is the hundreds column, the second is the tens, and the first is the ones–so 666 is read as six hundred and sixty six), the winning Maryland State lottery number the day after he was elected president was 666, and his home address was 666 St. Cloud Road before he and Nancy had the address changed.

And scripture tells us that 666 is the number of man associated with the devil, who leads people to damnation, and is damned himself.

If not coincidences, what are these things?

What are they from our point of view “as rational animals in the natural order of things,” and what are they from God’s point of view?

He must have known that some people would see them as bad omens–even president Reagan and his wife Nancy seem to have been disturbed by the number, or what other people might think of it, when they had their address changed.

Did God intend these things to mean anything?

Or did He will them to exist (or foresee and allow them) without intending them to mean anything in particular?

And if the latter, could they be called “coincidences” (in some sense of the word)?
 
Last edited:
Thank you, but the question isn’t whether we should pay attention to such things, but whether they must mean something (and whether it’s improper to call them coincidences.)

And it’s precisely because I believe God is above time (and sees all of it at once, as you say) that I ask this question.

I apologise if I seem superficial, or if my question seems below anyone’s I.Q., but I don’t think Carl Jung had low I.Q., or was particularly superficial.

He studied medicine, received a medical degree from the University of Zurich, was a disciple of Sigmund Freud, and broke with Freud because he disagreed with him about the human sex drive motivating almost all human behavior (and being behind all psychosis.)

He may have been wrong about many things, but he wasn’t shallow, and I’m sure he had a higher I.Q. than many of us.

According to Wikipedia:


In other words (like some of you) he didn’t really believe in coincidences.

Jung broke with Freud because (unlike Freud) he saw an intelligence at the center of the universe, and this led to his theory of symchronicity, and an interest in I-Ching (which he even used to counsel patients.)
https://www.carl-jung.net/iching.html

And even though he used the word “coincidence” (and usually put it in quotes, like I just did) he didn’t really believe in coincidences.

That’s why he invented the term “symchronicity.”

He believed that when things with no apparent causal relation appeared to be meaningful, they were related.

When the universe appeared to be sending you a message, it was.

And there were no real “coincidences.”

But does that logically follow if you see a God above time at the center of the universe?

Is it a necessary conclusion if you believe in a God above time–or could some things still be called 'coincidences" in some sense?

If not, I may be in a lot of trouble–along with Ron and Nancy.

L
I believe there must be some sense in which we can rightly use the word coincidence, because I don’t know how else to explain some of the things I’ve seen, and I came here hoping someone could help me think this through.

Have any of you read the Suma?

Did Aquinas have the answer?

Did it have anything to do with what he called “efficient causes” and 'secondary causes"?

And if you understand what he was saying, and how it applies here, could you please explain it to me?

And if you feel intellectually or spiritually superior to me (or Ron, or Nancy, or Carl) could you please condescend to our level.

Thank you.
 
Last edited:
Michael1801 said:
So my question is whether any or all of these things could be coincidences?
Click to expand...
The artifice that one employs to demonstrate the perception of meaning in a coincidence often betrays an agenda.

As an aside, I did not know IQ’s could be negative.
 
Where did I say an I.Q. can be negative?

I said I apologise if I seem below anyone’s I.Q. because a poster on this thread keeps saying that his I.Q. has dropped.

That was a reply to his comments.

And I apologise to marry 77 if I seem superficial.

As to having an agenda, I deliberately chose examples that I don’t believe are messages from God (like Ronald Reagan’s association with 666), but I did that to underscore the question (not as part of an agenda.)

The only agenda I have is trying to get some thoughtful comments here.

I don’t believe president Reagan was an agent of the devil, but he did have some connections to the number 666.

Two of the connections were enough to start some people thinking he was an agent of the devil before he was even sworn in office.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/arch...victory/b40adcaf-9005-40a3-92f7-8cc8c003369e/

And the third one was apparently disturbing enough for him to change his address

Do you think God intends such things as messages?

Could they be called coincidences in some sense of the word (or must they mean something)?

If you don’t think they’re messages, why not call them coincidences, and try to define what we mean by that?

I confess I’d like them to be coincidences, because I don’t want to see Ron and Nancy in hell.

Do you?

Now to bring this thread back on topic:

Jung believed that when things with no apparent causal relation appeared to be meaningful, they were related.

When the universe appeared to be sending you a message, it was.

That was his theory of symchronicity.

His belief in an intelligent mind at the center of the universe led him to the conclusion that there were no coincidences.

But is that a necessary conclusion if you see a God above time at the center of the universe?

Must we agree with Jung, or could some things still be called 'coincidences" in some sense?

If not, I may be in a lot of trouble–along with Ron and Nancy.

I believe there must be some sense in which we can rightly use the word coincidence, because I don’t know how else to explain some of the things I’ve seen, and I came here hoping someone could help me think this through.

Have any of you read the Suma?

Did Aquinas have the answer?

Did it have anything to do with what he called “efficient causes” and 'secondary causes"?

And if you understand what he was saying, and how it applies here, could you please explain it to me?
 
Last edited:
Michael1801 said:
Are Providence and coincidence mutually exclusive?
Click to expand...
Michael1801 said:
And did Aquinas say anything that might be relevant.
Click to expand...
As a matter of fact, he did. See “Summa Contra Gentiles”, Book 3 “Providence”, Chapter 74
“That divine providence does not exclude fortune and chance” (https://isidore.co/aquinas/ContraGentiles3a.htm#74).

The name of the chapter is a pretty clear hint, isn’t it? 🙂

For that matter, even if the things you listed were intended as such, they could be intended as something other than messages.

For example, they could be intended as a trap for the ones not willing to read the texts plainly, so that they would end up looking badly after finding those “messages” and publishing them.
 
MPat said:
40.png
Michael1801:
Are Providence and coincidence mutually exclusive?
Click to expand...
Michael1801 said:
And did Aquinas say anything that might be relevant.
Click to expand...
As a matter of fact, he did. See “Summa Contra Gentiles”, Book 3 “Providence”, Chapter 74
“That divine providence does not exclude fortune and chance” (https://isidore.co/aquinas/ContraGentiles3a.htm#74).

The name of the chapter is a pretty clear hint, isn’t it? 🙂

For that matter, even if the things you listed were intended as such, they could be intended as something other than messages.

For example, they could be intended as a trap for the ones not willing to read the texts plainly, so that they would end up looking badly after finding those “messages” and publishing them.
Click to expand...
Thank you–I followed the link, and I’m reading the chapter now.
 
Last edited:
I would too be interested in Aquinas opinion of this topic. I cant explain and why does anyone need to that sometimes things seemed to be significantly timed, but there that word is again. Are we instead supposed to take as faith that everything we do is as significant as anything else? Do we miss realizing many moments in time that we were significant in a timely way to someone else and we did not have a clue? Im going to go now and poke around Aquinas…
 
It has made me wonder imagine if everyone at the same time did the Will of God, all the time. Would that change the meaning of synchronicity?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top