tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13539920.post6111163380154310380..comments2024-03-27T07:01:13.725+02:00Comments on The Muqata: Software Helping Identify "Biblical Writing Styles"Jameel @ The Muqatahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15890095633246557332noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13539920.post-60375741964838373662011-07-04T21:04:52.534+03:002011-07-04T21:04:52.534+03:00I hope your interview goes well, and he is able to...I hope your interview goes well, and he is able to explain to your readers what his program does, and what it doesn't do, and why its so damn awesome.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13539920.post-76653370015718658632011-07-04T18:13:02.891+03:002011-07-04T18:13:02.891+03:00"How do you explain this vs the Bible Codes t..."How do you explain this vs the Bible Codes that confirm past events?"<br /><br />1) Because no one's figured out a way to use the Bible Codes to confirm past events.<br /><br />2) Because the Bible Codes require the text that's become standardized for Ashkenazim and Sephardim. But note that this may not reflect the Masoretic text and certainly wasn't the same text as Rambam used; Temani torahs are slightly different.<br /><br />3) Because the Bible Codes are really Text Codes; they can be used in any text, Hebrew or otherwise, holy or otherwise, but only ever to "predict" the past. The same thing works just as well in Shakespeare as it does in Psalms.<br /><br />4) Because the Bible Codes don't produce anything of statistical significance. The advantage of the computer reading, in this case, is that it reports a phenomenon. That phenomenon may be for any number of reasons, but scientifically speaking, the phenomenon is <i>there</i>. The question is why: maybe God felt it would communicate his point better, maybe the form fits with the story and is significant in a literary sense, maybe different authors contributed to the text...but Bible Codes aren't scientific and can't be used in such a manner.JLanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14815395805958892284noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13539920.post-86032702094955585502011-07-04T09:20:00.242+03:002011-07-04T09:20:00.242+03:00How do you explain this vs the Bible Codes that co...How do you explain this vs the Bible Codes that confirm past events? All of our history and future is contained within the Torah, but only evident 'after' the event. This could be looked at as if we have already been thru it all before, but because we are on earth and subject to the measurement of time, (in replay) it seems like some events are 'future' when they really have occurred again. In this we have 'free choice' to remedy (teshuva) all our actions.<br /><br />Only our 'talking to HaShem' is in the immediate and actual mode.<br /><br />This is my analysis after researching (which is not the final word on the subject).Neshamahttp://Habayitah.blogspot.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13539920.post-30589941223763972132011-07-04T06:54:21.049+03:002011-07-04T06:54:21.049+03:00"I have no idea why people think that a compu..."I have no idea why people think that a computer program can verify the supposed Multiple Authors theory. Computers are programed on the basis of assumptions and it's no trick to program a computer to give you answers that you want from a text."<br /><br />The computer can't verify any theories and it can't give any answers. What the computer can do is give you raw data: for example, how often does the word "VaYomer" appear in one passage vs. another passage, how long do certain pesukim tend to be, whether the word "Ki" is used in one section but not in another. Those tendencies, in most texts, would point to different authors: using it in English could, for example, help to verify whether the plays definitely written by "Shakespeare" and the plays thought to have been collaborations are written by the same author or different authors, or when the author Henry James switched from writing his books to dictating them (based on word count and complexity). It's no different than previous ideas, other than verifying that there are statistically significant differences between texts. It can't tell you why those differences exist. Rather, the interpretation is left up to humans.JLanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14815395805958892284noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13539920.post-26208217479220618162011-07-03T22:23:32.926+03:002011-07-03T22:23:32.926+03:00I have no idea why people think that a computer pr...I have no idea why people think that a computer program can verify the supposed Multiple Authors theory. Computers are programed on the basis of assumptions and it's no trick to program a computer to give you answers that you want from a text.<br /><br />The truth is that in the 1800s Wellhausen cooked up this theory and decided that the Torah was written by 5 authors - with the Redactor who supposedly covered up the evidence of the others but botched it once or twice. Then he and his students took his theory to it's (il)logical end. By applying Wellhausen's assumptions and methods they "discovered" not just 4 or 5 authors but some THIRTY. Those who promote this theory like to make it sound reasonable that only a handful of authors wrote the Torah. Supporters of it are either ignorant of this or deliberately hide the fact that his ideas can and were easily taken to the point of absurdity. For if some thirty authors can be discerned by his operating principles and guidelines it means that his assumptions and methods were clearly faulty.Rabeladhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18391107244478116852noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13539920.post-81082779576181677162011-07-03T18:43:55.984+03:002011-07-03T18:43:55.984+03:00For a counterpoint, consider that very many of the...For a counterpoint, consider that very many of the books in the bible (and their internal stories) are arranged in "chiasmus" form--a kind of parallelism.<br /><br />(Google "bible, chiasmus", and see what turns up.)<br /><br />For that sort of complex arrangement to be found, a single author or editor must have been at work.<br /><br />(Just my 2 cents worth...)Quasimodohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06760987825874301133noreply@blogger.com