About
Community
News of the Temple
Community Bulletin Board
Chat
Art
Carnality
Entertainment
Science
Society
Technology
bbs | search | rss | faq | about | register
digg | del.icio.us | sphere | google

Go Back   Community > Society > My God Can Beat the Shit Out of Your God

My God Can Beat the Shit Out of Your God For discussing any and all religious viewpoints. Intolerance will not be tolerated. Keeping your sense of humor is required. Posting messages about theological paradoxes is encouraged.

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1   Add Digital_Savior to your ignore list  
Old 2006-03-17, 05:25
Digital_Savior Digital_Savior is offline
Regular
 
.:six degrees of synesthesia:.
Default

One of the primary challenges of the Christian apologist is attempting to refute the claims of the skeptic pertaining to the inerrancy of the Bible.

As a Christian, I believe that it is perfect in form and function, just as God says it is. Historical and archeological findings have only bolstered this belief, as they consistently corroborate the information provided in the Bible. It is simply a matter of education (or lack thereof) that prevents a reader from understanding it's infallability.

Because of this belief, I have decided to refute a common claim; the Bible incorrectly calculates the value of Pi in 1 Kings 7:23.

That said, on with the show.



* ~ * ~ *



1 Kings 7:23-26 - "He made the Sea of cast metal, circular in shape, measuring ten cubits from rim to rim and five cubits high. It took a line of thirty cubits to measure around it. 24 Below the rim, gourds encircled it — ten to a cubit. The gourds were cast in two rows in one piece with the Sea.

25 The Sea stood on twelve bulls, three facing north, three facing west, three facing south and three facing east. The Sea rested on top of them, and their hindquarters were toward the center. 26 It was a handbreadth in thickness, and its rim was like the rim of a cup, like a lily blossom. It held two thousand baths."

From the Jewish Bible:

"He made the cast metal "Sea" circular, seventeen-and-a-half feet from rim to rim, eight-and-three quarter feet high and fifty-two-and-a-half feet in circumference."

***(52.5/17.5) still = 3***

"Under its rim, three hundred gourds encircled it in two rows; they were cast when the Sea was cast.

It rested on twelve oxen, three looking north, three looking west, three looking south, and three looking east, all with their hindquarters toward the center. The Sea was set on top of them.

It was a handbreadth thick, its rim was made like the rim of a cup, like the flower of a lily; and its capacity was 11,000 gallons."

Quote:
quote:For those that consider these verses proof that the Bible is fallible, please review the following website for a logical, mathematical explanation of why that assumption is incorrect:

ON THE RABBINICAL EXEGESIS OF AN ENHANCED BIBLICAL VALUE OF PI.


According to my Strong's Concordance, the following units of measurement in Hebrew are:

- 1 Handbreadth = 3 inches

- 1 Cubit = 1.5 feet

- 1 Bath = 6 gallons

This means that the bath was 15 feet from rim to rim, 45 feet in circumference, and 7.5 feet tall.

When plotted, this does not make a perfect circle.

Quote:
quote:

For any circle, the ratio of the circumference to the diameter is pi, meaning:

c / d = pi

In this circle:

c = 45

d = 15

meaning,

45 / 15 = 3

3 /= pi

Therefore this cannot be a circle.


The author of the scripture described it as "circular", not "a perfect circle."

This exposes a flaw in the logic on the part of the skeptic, since they have falsely assumed that the scripture gives information that it clearly does not.

The author of 1 Kings (whom Jews believe to be Jeremiah) was not trying to prove that Pi was anything, let alone 3. Nor was it implied that the term "circular" represented a perfect circle, which you'd have to assume if you're going to claim that this scripture contains a mathematical flaw, thus disproving Biblical inerrancy.

The burden of proof is on the skeptic. Claims of factual inaccuracy are dubious at best, since I did a simple internet search and found an explanation of the mathematics of the scripture in 1 Kings easily.

[This message has been edited by Digital_Savior (edited 03-20-2006).]
  #2   Add Elephantitis Man to your ignore list  
Old 2006-03-17, 05:35
Elephantitis Man Elephantitis Man is offline
Regular
 
Missouri
Default

Unfortunately, I don't base my disbelief in God on the mathematics displayed in the Bible.

If I was so fascinated with geometry that I'd base my belief system on such, I'd probably join Neopythagoreanism instead of Christianity.

http://www.totse.com/bbs/biggrin.gif
  #3   Add Digital_Savior to your ignore list  
Old 2006-03-17, 05:48
Digital_Savior Digital_Savior is offline
Regular
 
.:six degrees of synesthesia:.
Default

That wasn't the point of this thread.

The point is, the math given in 1 Kings 7:23 doesn't prove that the Bible is fallible, because the math is not trying to prove that pi=3.

This gives the skeptic one less reason to disbelieve in God, since the Bible is the only tangible proof we have of His existence, aside from creation itself.

If it is perfect, as He says it is, there is no reason to disbelieve God, because the proof is in the pudding.

You could willfully reject Him, but to disbelieve based on the Bible's fallibility is not possible, because it is inerrant.
  #4   Add Real.PUA to your ignore list  
Old 2006-03-17, 05:54
Real.PUA Real.PUA is offline
Regular
 
Cuntville
Default

Lets stone some infidels.
  #5   Add Digital_Savior to your ignore list  
Old 2006-03-17, 05:57
Digital_Savior Digital_Savior is offline
Regular
 
.:six degrees of synesthesia:.
Default

I'd prefer conversion.
  #6   Add Elephantitis Man to your ignore list  
Old 2006-03-17, 06:06
Elephantitis Man Elephantitis Man is offline
Regular
 
Missouri
Default

Quote:
quote:Originally posted by Digital_Savior:

to disbelieve based on the Bible's fallibility is not possible, because it is inerrant.
...ROFL.

Ok, Digital, answer me this:

I'm sure your aware of the discrepancies between the story of the nativity in Matthew and Luke. Matthew says evil King Herod ordered all the babies to die. Luke doesn't mention Herod or his death order against babies at all.

Here's the discrepancy I'd like you to unravel:

Matthew 2:13-15

13And when they were departed, behold, the angel of the Lord appeareth to Joseph in a dream, saying, Arise, and take the young child and his mother, and flee into Egypt, and be thou there until I bring thee word: for Herod will seek the young child to destroy him. 14When he arose, he took the young child and his mother by night, and departed into Egypt: 15And was there until the death of Herod: that it might be fulfilled which was spoken of the Lord by the prophet, saying, Out of Egypt have I called my son.

So Joseph and Mary fled in the night to Egypt, where they remained until Herod died. This happened right after the magi had departed (beginning of verse 13).

However:

Luke 2:21-24

21And when eight days were accomplished for the circumcising of the child, his name was called JESUS, which was so named of the angel before he was conceived in the womb. 22And when the days of her purification according to the law of Moses were accomplished, they brought him to Jerusalem, to present him to the Lord; 23(As it is written in the law of the LORD, Every male that openeth the womb shall be called holy to the Lord http://www.totse.com/bbs/wink.gif 24And to offer a sacrifice according to that which is said in the law of the Lord, A pair of turtledoves, or two young pigeons.

This says (and this conforms with Jewish custom), that Jesus was taken to Jerusalem 8 days after he was born to be circumcised.

Furthermore:

Luke 2:39

39And when they had performed all things according to the law of the Lord, they returned into Galilee, to their own city Nazareth.

Joseph and Mary took Jesus straight from Jerusalem to Nazareth. No Egypt there! Read the filler in between if you like; it's not there!

I ask you, Digital, where was Jesus 8 days after he was born? In Jerusalem being circumcised? Or in Egypt hiding from Herod?
  #7   Add Digital_Savior to your ignore list  
Old 2006-03-17, 06:32
Digital_Savior Digital_Savior is offline
Regular
 
.:six degrees of synesthesia:.
Default

Elephantitis Man, this thread is dealing with PI in the BIBLE.

Please create other threads for the topics you have posted.

I don't want this thread to be derailed.

Thank you.
  #8   Add Digital_Savior to your ignore list  
Old 2006-03-17, 06:34
Digital_Savior Digital_Savior is offline
Regular
 
.:six degrees of synesthesia:.
Default

Actually, I will create it for you.
  #9   Add Dragonsthrone to your ignore list  
Old 2006-03-17, 07:04
Dragonsthrone Dragonsthrone is offline
Regular
 
Jamestown Nd USA
Default

Matthew and Luke were 2 different people, and they both had different perspectives on what was happening. When you have more than 1 person describing something they saw, you have slight differences.
  #10   Add Digital_Savior to your ignore list  
Old 2006-03-17, 07:35
Digital_Savior Digital_Savior is offline
Regular
 
.:six degrees of synesthesia:.
Default

The differences were not based on perspective, since both accounts were inspired by God, and therefore there is no room for contradiction, even if the account comes from two separate sources.

I REFUTE THE "CONTRADICTION" HERE.
Closed Thread


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 07:39.


 

 

totse.com certificate signatures
 
 
About | Advertise | Art | Carnality | Community | Contact Us | Copyright Policy | Entertainment | FAQ
Link to totse.com | Science | Search | Society | Submissions | Technology
Hot Topics
The great films
Harsh Times
Let the right one in
Do NOT watch the movie Burn After Reading
Notorious
Sicko
WW2 movies from the other side
Disturbing as oppose to Disgusting
 
Sponsored Links
 
Ads presented by the
AdBrite Ad Network

 

TSHIRT HELL T-SHIRTS