“True, but we are not given many variations, just the one we have. So your point is wrong.”
No there are many variations (as outlined before) plus the potential for more if more chaseiros/yeseiros are introduced. Either they all have codes (which would lessen the uniqueness of the codes) Or only ours, in which case why are we the lucky ones. Mah nafshach the premise is flawed!
Simple question: Say I stick in Some vavs here and there r”l would the new product contain codes? Keep in mind this is no longer min hashamayim this is me making trouble.
Now what if those same vavs were introduced by accident (as has happned) would THIS contain codes?
“If you find that strange (I don’t have an opinion) so posit that it’s there as well. Mah nafshach.”
I find it very hard to believe that you dont have an opinion, you have an opinion are virtually everything. Even if you dont, formulate one. As mentioned previously you have the mah nafshach backwards. Wether all versions of the Torah have codes or only one. The premise falls apart.
(What would carry weight, is if the exact version handed down at Sinai contains these codes. THAT would be interesting, but sadly lkula alma we do not have the exact version from Sinai)
“Whose codes, whose methodology, which proponents? I’m maskim that Drosnin is a quack.”
I’ll bet the Christian coders are quacks too. Only codes that relate to yahadus are from non-quacks.
“For the third (fourth? fifth?) time, I don’t have an opinion on the actual math. There are apparently experts on either side. “
Not quite, in your last post you said the codes were “mathematicaly impossible” see here: “If the codes which Rips and the other people used are mathematically impossible,” I was respnding to this point.