Talk:Numerology

Numbers and their corresponding planets.
According to Numerology, everything is designated with a number in this World. These numbers are very influential in one's life. Each letter of our name is associated with a number having some specific meaning, so do the Planets have. Every Planet is given a number in numerology, let's take a look to it. 1 = Sun. 2 = Moon. 3 = Jupiter. 4 = Uranus. 5 = Mercury. 6 = Venus. 7 = Neptune. 8 = Saturn. 9 = Mars. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 14.139.233.50 (talk) 16:34, 10 November 2017 (UTC)

October 3 1993 Bear334 (talk) 22:24, 30 January 2020 (UTC)

St. Augustine quote
I believe that the St. Augustine quote is probably dubious. I see that quote all over the Internet, but never with reference to its source. I am aware that St. Augustine did say many things concerning numbers, but that particular quote doesn't sound like something he would have said. Sounds more like a New Age-inspired paraphrase. Unless somebody is able to trace the quote back to one of his writings, it ought to be removed. 173.49.57.233 (talk) 17:02, 7 March 2018 (UTC)


 * Interesting - you're right that it doesn't show up in the standard list of St. Augustine quotes, and you can easily find people asking "where is this quote from?" without getting a good answer. So you're probably correct that it's bogus, and definitely correct that it should be removed if we don't get a good source soon. - DavidWBrooks (talk) 17:55, 7 March 2018 (UTC)

Biblical numerology
Is there anything in Biblical numerology that is worth saving? The page has been a magnet for unreliable sources. I'm thinking of nominating it for AfD but wanted to check if anything could be copied to this page. --mikeu talk 01:15, 12 March 2019 (UTC)
 * There is an individual, Vernon Jenkins, MSc, who has analysed the Old Testaments first part. If you are interested, go to Other Bible Code and read. Since he is an Master of Science holder, he cannot really be a nutter. He takes the matter seriously. The web page is a bit less than mastery in beauty made, but there some golden nuggets too, pictures which illustrates his points. What heading would this have in Article section, if included at some time? Any suggestions?Per in Sweden (talk) 05:14, 28 November 2019 (UTC) Note that there is a difference between unreliable sources and verifiable unreliable sources. Vernon's page is the latter. For example wikipedia is a verifiable unreliable source, since it includes references that can be checked, but still false information could happen, therefore unreliable. I know this is hard to take, but wikipedia is not on par with encyclopedias written by professors. Per in Sweden (talk) 05:45, 28 November 2019 (UTC) It is not widely recognized, but you can verify what he says. If a web page said "The Bible has three occurrences of Abba", this can be verified with reliable sources, such as biblegateway.com . Therefore this web page is verifiable, it lets you do the work. If a web page claims there are 777 occurrences of Abba in the Bible, this is simply an unverifiable web page, since verification shows it is bogus myth spreading. The Vernon site is verifiable unreliable source, based on the Hebrew and English Bible. Per in Sweden (talk) 05:37, 28 November 2019 (UTC)

dubious-discuss tag in article
On March 7, 2018, 173.49.57.233 added a "dubious-discuss" tag to a quote in the article, but I see no discussion here. The quote tagged dubious is, "Numbers are the Universal language offered by the deity to humans as confirmation of the truth". Was the dubious tag for the quote itself being unsourced or was this an issue with the content of the quote? If it was for the missing source of the quote, it should be marked as needing a source, i.e., citation needed. If it was for the content of the quote and the quote is valid, the dubious tag should be removed and a citation should be provided. If it was for the content of the quote and the quote is invalid, the quote and dubious tag should both be removed.

Pythagoras was Greek
It seems rather odd that no-one seems to notice the elephant in the room (or point out) that Pythagoras most likely did not speak English and it is therefore logical to deduce that his system of numerology used the Greek language. How any system, be it Pythagorean, Chaldean or whatever is supposed to work across all languages seems illogical as values must change - rendering such a system questionable if not of dubious merit. And what happens when you Anglicise Greek names? (or for that matter, any language) Does the vibration magically change and where is the consistency?

Which raises another question - how do we know that the calendar we use has all the numbers in the correct place? Surely it is arbitrary, since nobody has been able to prove scientifically that any calendar is numerologically exact.

One more thing... it irks me how arts like astrology and numerology are pejoratively labelled as "pseudoscience" when most practitioners make no claim that what they practice is a "science". These arts are at best crafts, not science at all. Science is limited to phenomena and therefore fails to account for noumenal i.e. metaphysical spirituality. Pseudoscience is a misnomer, surely! 49.185.1.82 (talk) 09:51, 16 September 2019 (UTC)


 * Another argument against the Pythogorean system is that the Ancient Greeks did not use Arabic numerals!
 * However as to your comment that science deals with phenomena, whereas numerology does not: surely it does.  Surely the process of numerology aims to come up with some sort of prediction - "you will have good health" or "you will have many children" or whatever.  These are phenomena, and can be checked.  Similarly "there will be an eclipse tomorrow" relates to a phenomenon that can be checked.  The difference is that when the numerological predictions are checked, they don't work.  That's why they are psuedoscience, not science.

Baska436 (talk) 12:12, 20 April 2020 (UTC)