Pi and the Bible

I was reading the Bible recently and came across the dimensions given
for the cast-metal "sea" that was placed in the courtyard of Solomon's
temple. Circular in shape, it measured 10 cubits in diameter and 30
cubits in circumference.....say what? This rang a bell. Immediately,
Talk Origins came to mind...ding, ding.

I remember reading on this newsgroup that there is a problem with
those measurements, and therefore, the Bible is unscientific. Pi,
after all, is 3.14159 not 3.

So tucking my most recent mathematical feather (5/0) into my thinking
cap, I tried to figure this one out. The vast basin measured 10
cubits from rim to rim. It was also a handbreadth in thickness. So
now the question is, was the diameter measured from outer rim to outer
rim or from inner rim to inner rim?

The cubit (meaning elbow or forearm) was an ancient unit of measure
that represented the distance from the elbow to the tip of the middle
finger. Using 18 inches arbitrarily as the average length of a man's
forearm, we have a circumference of 30 x 18" = 540 inches. If the rim
was a handbreadth thick, and the average width of a man's hand back
then was 4 inches, then the diameter from outer rim to outer rim would
be 10 x 18 = 180 inches, or from inner rim to inner rim, it would be
172 inches (subtract 4 inches from both sides)

Since we don't know which circumference was used, whether the
outer-rim circumference or the inner-rim circumference, then I shall
hazard a guess that the 540-inch circumference refers to the outer-rim
circle and the 172-inch diameter refers to the inner-rim to inner-rim
measurement.

Using those dimensions, I get 540/172 = 3.1395348 which, when rounded
up, gives a Pi of 3.14.

Well, that was fun, doodling around in my sandbox, waiting to see what
the real mathematicians on this forum have to say.

Meanwhile, how about I tackle another myth. I've mentioned this
before on T.O., but it bears repeating: The four-legged insect.

I find it interesting that evolutionists, who believe that mutations
are the source of new species and who are constantly on the lookout
for transitionals, will subconsciously reveal their disbelief of their
theory by sticking to the constancy of unchanging species. If anybody
can believe in four-legged insects, it should be the evolutionist who
expects life forms to morph, adding or losing limbs according to the
vagaries of mutations.

However, that is just an aside, and I will agree with them that
insects are always known to have six legs, not four. So why, then,
does the Bible seem to talk about four-legged insects? It doesn't.

It says, "winged creatures that walk on all fours...that have legs
above their feet with which to leap.." Four feet for walking and two
legs above the feet for leaping = six legs. And it was referring to
grasshoppers, as one example of this kind of insect.

There now. So can we quietly bury the four-legged insect under the
sand and leave it there forever?

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Pi and the Bible
    ... it measured 10 cubits in diameter and 30 ... those measurements, and therefore, the Bible is unscientific. ... cubits from rim to rim. ... but it bears repeating: The four-legged insect. ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Pi and the Bible
    ... it measured 10 cubits in diameter and 30 ... those measurements, and therefore, the Bible is unscientific. ... cubits from rim to rim. ... but it bears repeating: The four-legged insect. ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Pi and the Bible
    ... it measured 10 cubits in diameter and 30 ... those measurements, and therefore, the Bible is unscientific. ... cubits from rim to rim. ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Pi and the Bible
    ... it measured 10 cubits in diameter and 30 ... those measurements, and therefore, the Bible is unscientific. ... cubits from rim to rim. ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Pi and the Bible
    ... it measured 10 cubits in diameter and 30 ... those measurements, and therefore, the Bible is unscientific. ... cubits from rim to rim. ...
    (talk.origins)