Which King of the House of David
Was the Closest to David Himself?

The Intriguing Results of Closeness Comparisons

In the January/February 2007 issue, we examined the results of a series of closeness comparisons. For example, we searched for ELSs of David the King, noted the location of the 25 ELSs with the shortest skips in the Tanakh (Old Testament), and recorded the shortest distance between any of the letters of each of these ELSs and literal appearances of the name David in the Tanakh. Table 1 presents the results, ranked by the shortest distance for each ELS.

Table 1
Minimum Distances between the Letters of David the King ELSs
and Literal Appearances of David in the Tanakh

That some of these David the King ELSs would be close to literal appearances of David in the Tanakh is not surprising. What is unexpected is that all but two of the 25 are quite close. The odds against the above minimum distances being as small as they are is about one in 52,500. We tried doing the same type of searches for ELSs of the names of other kings in the House of David. It turned out that none of these groups of ELSs exhibited anything unusual at all in terms of closeness to literal appearances of David in the Tanakh. The King Solomon was not close, and neither were Abijah, Ahaz, Amon, Asa, Joram, Jotham, or Manasseh. We also tried Saul, and he wasn't close either. The names of the other kings did not appear as ELSs at least 25 times in the Tanakh.

Then we tried this same exercise for The King Yeshua (Jesus) and Yeshua the King. To our surprise, the 25 ELSs of The King Yeshua with the shortest skips in the Tanakh were just as remarkably close to literal mentions of David in the Tanakh as were the 25 ELSs of The King David. The odds against this were one in 5,214. We were looking at something quite unusual. This led us to ask Dr. Jacobi to examine each of these 25 The King Yeshua ELSs for possible extensions. The remarkable results of his reviews are presented in the next article.

In Table 2, the minimum distances of the ELSs for each indicated royal title have been presented in order of increasing magnitude. For comparison, the comparable results are shown for Jotham the King, the royal titles that had the smallest average minimum distance among all of the royal titles of the kings in the House of David. The distances highlighted in yellow and blue below are clearly unusual in comparison to those for other royal titles. This table is similar to Table 9 from the Closeness Comparisons article in the January/February 2007 issue.

Table 2
Minimum Distances of ELSs of David's Different Royal Titles
Shown by Increasing Rank of Minimum Distance
from Literal Appearance of David in the Tanakh

Table 3 displays four different types of average minimum distances for the various royal titles. In the right column are shown the odds of chance occurrence of the average distance (excluding the two largest).

Table 3
Average Minimum Distance of 25 ELSs with Shortest Skips
to Literal David in Text

Table 3 is the same as Table 10 from the Closeness Comparisons article, except that the results for The King Yeshua have been inserted in the third row of the table. The ranking of The King Yeshua ELSs for closeness to David in the Tanakh varies according to what kind of average distance is computed. If you take the average of all 25 distances, The King Yeshua is closer to David than David himself (2,356 vs. 8,416). If you take the average excluding the largest distance, The King Yeshua comes in second. And if you take the average excluding the largest two distances, or the largest five distances, The King Yeshua comes in third.

Are these unusual results a possible indication from Bible codes of claims that Jesus was "the son of David" and perhaps even the Messiah, as most Christians believe? We were curious as to what extensions to the 25 The King Yeshua ELSs would say. The next article covers that in detail.

King Yeshua Extension Probability

Apart from any questions of the content of the extensions that Jacobi found is the sheer number of extended codes that he discovered. Table 4 provides a comparison of the number of ELSs that would have different numbers of extensions.

Table 4
A Comparison of the Actual and Expected Number
of ELSs with Different Numbers of Extensions

The odds of Jacobi having found as many extensions as he did is

While it would be expected by chance that Jacobi would have found one or more extensions for 16.2 of the 45 ELSs by chance, he found extensions for 29. While chance might account for 4.68 of the ELSs having two or more extensions, Nathan found them for 28, or nearly six times as many. Though chance might lead to 1.22 of the ELSs having three or more extensions, he found 3+ extensions for 13 of these ELSs, or more than ten times as many.

The above probabilities hold given only the requirement that extensions consist of good Hebrew, regardless of the reasonableness or relevance of the content of the extensions. As we will see in the next article, what is overwhelming about these extended ELSs is the likely relevance of the content of every one of the discovered extensions.

Enjoy finding your own Bible codes.
Bible code search software is available in our online store.

Subscribe Free!

By signing up to be a member of The Isaac Newton Bible Research Society, you will have access to more than fifteen years of research by our team of Bible code researchers.

Sign up to be a member today.

Bombshell examines two massive, recently discovered clusters of codes in the Hebrew Old Testament. To read more about Bombshell, click here, or click below to order from Amazon today!


Copyright © 2016 BibleCodeDigest.com