Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 78 (8908 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 05-23-2019 9:14 PM
25 online now:
edge, JonF, kjsimons (3 members, 22 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: WeloTemo
Post Volume:
Total: 851,966 Year: 7,002/19,786 Month: 1,543/1,581 Week: 365/393 Day: 89/99 Hour: 0/3


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   10 cubits across and 30 cubits around
RAZD
Member
Posts: 19843
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004
Member Rating: 5.8


Message 1 of 10 (98253)
04-06-2004 10:13 PM


Recap of the argument from Where are the YEC thread
http://www.evcforum.net/cgi-bin/dm.cgi?action=page&f=3&t=78&p=6

Eta Carinae :

There are so many things in the Bible that have been proven wrong that for you to say that is bearing false witness.

Pi=3 anyone?

Whatever:

Eta Carinae, The bible does have an example supporting 3.14 is pi, meaning of course its talking about the inside of the vessel, the thickness was a handsbreath thick, so the outside circumference of the vessel would still of been 31.4 cubits, though the entire measurement of height would of been 5 cubits, showing the entire verse is not in conflict with pi, unless your assuming 5 cubits was the height of the inside of the vessel, but the verse doesn't support this assertion, the vessel was 5 cubits high, if you looking at it sitting on top of the pillar, it had to give the 5 cubit measure, so you knew how deep to dig the molding, and to have the inside measurement of the molding, so you have all the measurements necessary to make the molding, etc...

P.S. It appears though that the height of the inside of the vessel was 5 cubits minus the handswidth thickness, up to the top of the brim, which supports when the vessel was full to the bottom of the brim, it contained 2,000 bath waters, and when it was filled to top of the brim to overflowing, it contained 3,000 bath waters, etc...

kjv 1Ki 7:23 And he made a molten sea, ten cubits from the one brim to the other: [it was] round all about, and his height [was] five cubits: and a line of thirty cubits did compass it round about.

kjv 1Ki 7:26 And it [was] an hand breadth thick, and the brim thereof was wrought like the brim of a cup, with flowers of lilies: it contained two thousand baths.

Loudmouth:

My belief is that they just rounded off the number, which is a normal human tendency. Imagine saying that the vessel was 10 cubits in diameter and 31.4 cubits around. Are there numbers with decimals anywhere in the Bible? For me, 30 cubits is good enough since having an accurate account of the circumference of a vessel has nothing to do with the theology of the Bible. Of course, using creationist math and logic I could claim that pi was different in the past and make up an ad hoc hypothesis to prove it.

Whatever:

Good point, they kept the measurements without decimal points, 10 cubits would of been the outside dimensions, and the inside circumference would of been 30 cubits, though we can calculate what the inside diameter would of been, it was 9.55 cubits, the bible interestingly is actually supporting pi, because the measurements don't conflict, etc...

P.S. 9.55 divided by 2 = 4.777 cubits high, the inside of the vessel, minus the height of the brim, to account for the 2,000 bath waters, and to the top of the brim to account for the 3,000 bath waters, etc...

AbbyLeever

I am having trouble with this interpretation. First off, a rounding would go to 31 and not 30 as there is no reason to impose a decimal count rounding ... if it said something like a "decacubit" across and 3 around I might be so convinced. What measure are we using for the cubit, 20"? and a span is 9"? If the OD is 10 cubits it is 200" across and the ID is 200-2x9 = 182" ... you need to take the span off each end of the OD ... 30 cubits is 600" and inside circumference is 182pi = 571" while the outside circumference is 200pi = 628" ... either way you are out over 1 cubit in the measurement. The only interpretation is that the 3:1 ratio is implied, whether they are rough measures or one inside and one outside (what nonsense ...?)

Whatever:

AbbyLeever, I'm kinda going with the sacred cubit = 25 inches, if the outside diameter is 10 cubits, and the inside diameter is 9.55 cubits calculated from the inside circumference, thats a difference of .45 cubits, multiply .45 times 25 inches = 11.25 inches divided by 2 = 5.625 inches = one handswidth, however, didn't find a measurement for a handswidth by doing a google search, just assuming its going to be around 5.625 inches for the thickness of the vessel, etc...

Okay "sacred cubit it is ... from wikipedia" on "cubit":

There were several cubits of different magnitudes that were used. In Egypt, the common cubit was the length of the forearm from the elbow to the tip of the middle finger (about 18 inches / 46 cm). It was divided into the span of the hand (one-half cubit), the palm or width of the hand (one sixth), and the digit or width of a finger (one twenty-fourth).

Because one person's forearm tended to be a different length to the next person's, a standardised Royal Master Cubit, or Sacred Cubit, was cut in granite. This was 7 palms or 28 digits long, and was used in the construction of buildings and monuments (such as the pyramids) and in surveying.

So 1 Sacred Cubit (SC) = 7 hands (and it looks like a hand = 3" -- 18/6)
and OD = 10 SC and outer circ = 31.42 SC,
and ID = 10-2/7 = 9.714 SC and inner circ = 30.52

Pretty obvious error imho, even if you ignore the fact that the diameter measurement is to the outside and the circumference has to be to the inside, a most curious way to measure anything, and it still is not close enough to round down to 30.

Face it, the book says 3 to 1 ratio, call it poetic license and be done with it.


we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand

RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
{{{Buddha walks off laughing with joy}}}


Replies to this message:
 Message 2 by SRO2, posted 04-06-2004 10:29 PM RAZD has not yet responded
 Message 3 by johnfolton, posted 04-06-2004 10:51 PM RAZD has responded

SRO2 
Inactive Suspended Member


Message 2 of 10 (98258)
04-06-2004 10:29 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by RAZD
04-06-2004 10:13 PM


I can't help 'em here.
Not even the new math can explain it, even throwin' in the metric system and a tolerance stack up by an order of magnitude...unless, one hand is at the molecular level...if one hand equals a wood carbon atom...cipher, cipher....oh wait...thats goin' the wrong way...I'm just building a negative Biblical Noah's Ark...whew...3 years in 12th grade finaly paid off!
This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by RAZD, posted 04-06-2004 10:13 PM RAZD has not yet responded

johnfolton 
Suspended Member (Idle past 3730 days)
Posts: 2024
Joined: 12-04-2005


Message 3 of 10 (98266)
04-06-2004 10:51 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by RAZD
04-06-2004 10:13 PM


I was just replying to Eta Carinae, suggestion that the bible is in error in respect to pi, you have all the dimensions to make the casting, the diameter is in respect to the outside of the container, as is the height, the circumference is in respect to the inside of the container, and it says the container is to be round all about, so the verse isn't in error in respect to pi, but knowing pi we can calculate the thickness of the vessel, I came up with 5.65 inches, I'll just bet if you lay a ruler and measure the breath of a normal mans hand it will be closer to 5.65 inches than 3 inches, so leaning its the mold was based off the 25 inch sacred cubit, etc...

P.S. It doesn't matter the inside dimension circumference is going to be different than the outside circumference, because we know pi, and that the outside diameter is 10 cubits, we then know the outside circumference will be 31.4 cubits, and the inside diameter is 9.55 cubits, etc...though bet the person that made the molds, hand width was 5.65 inches wide, but he didn't need a handbreath measurement to make the mold, he only needed the three measurements, 5 cubits, 10 cubits, and 30 cubits, etc...

[This message has been edited by whatever, 04-06-2004]


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by RAZD, posted 04-06-2004 10:13 PM RAZD has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 4 by SRO2, posted 04-06-2004 11:18 PM johnfolton has responded
 Message 5 by RAZD, posted 04-06-2004 11:24 PM johnfolton has not yet responded

SRO2 
Inactive Suspended Member


Message 4 of 10 (98273)
04-06-2004 11:18 PM
Reply to: Message 3 by johnfolton
04-06-2004 10:51 PM


It could be a billion cubits.
It could be a billion cubits...it could have the square footage of 10 nuclear powered ocean going aircraft carriers...it still couldn't house and supply consumables for thousands of animals for a DAY, much less forty...it doesn't make any sense...now ya'll quit being silly. One aircraft carrier has to be re-supplied monthly just to feed a few hundred humans.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 3 by johnfolton, posted 04-06-2004 10:51 PM johnfolton has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 7 by johnfolton, posted 04-06-2004 11:40 PM SRO2 has responded

RAZD
Member
Posts: 19843
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004
Member Rating: 5.8


Message 5 of 10 (98276)
04-06-2004 11:24 PM
Reply to: Message 3 by johnfolton
04-06-2004 10:51 PM


7 hands per sacred cubit
whatever did you miss about the sacred cubit being defined as 7 hands -- it does not matter what the hand or the cubit measures in inches if on is defined by the other.

1 SC == 7 hands (period)

it doesn't matter that a "hand" for measuring a horse is 4" or that hands now (whole skeletons) tend to be bigger or that the 50+ male in this household hand is actual factual 3.5" across ... the ratio is set a 7 to 1.

the rest of your argument is wishful after the fact make it right thinking. and it is wrong.

want to try a different cubit?

how about door number 3 ...?


we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand

RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
{{{Buddha walks off laughing with joy}}}


This message is a reply to:
 Message 3 by johnfolton, posted 04-06-2004 10:51 PM johnfolton has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 6 by SRO2, posted 04-06-2004 11:29 PM RAZD has not yet responded

SRO2 
Inactive Suspended Member


Message 6 of 10 (98280)
04-06-2004 11:29 PM
Reply to: Message 5 by RAZD
04-06-2004 11:24 PM


Re: 7 hands per sacred cubit
What matters is THIS;
General Characteristics, Nimitz Class
Builder: Newport News Shipbuilding Co., Newport News, Va.
Power Plant: Two nuclear reactors, four shafts
Length, overall: 1,092 feet (332.85 meters)
Flight Deck Width: 252 feet (76.8 meters)
Beam: 134 feet (40.84 meters)
Displacement: Approx. 97,000 tons (87,996.9 metric tons) full load
Speed: 30+ knots (34.5+ miles per hour)
Aircraft: 85
Cost: about $4.5 billion each

Noah did NOT build one of these!


This message is a reply to:
 Message 5 by RAZD, posted 04-06-2004 11:24 PM RAZD has not yet responded

johnfolton 
Suspended Member (Idle past 3730 days)
Posts: 2024
Joined: 12-04-2005


Message 7 of 10 (98286)
04-06-2004 11:40 PM
Reply to: Message 4 by SRO2
04-06-2004 11:18 PM


Two chapiters were made for Solomons Temple
Rocket, Its all about the two chapiters made of molten brass that were made for Solomons temple, that sat on top of two pillars to contain the bath waters, etc...

Abbyleever, I actually hear you, if the cubit was a bit less than 25 inches it would bring the hands width closer to 4 to 5 inches, but the problem isn't really about the cubit, but pi, but agree with you, there is no problem with pi, etc...

[This message has been edited by whatever, 04-06-2004]


This message is a reply to:
 Message 4 by SRO2, posted 04-06-2004 11:18 PM SRO2 has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 8 by SRO2, posted 04-06-2004 11:54 PM johnfolton has responded

SRO2 
Inactive Suspended Member


Message 8 of 10 (98289)
04-06-2004 11:54 PM
Reply to: Message 7 by johnfolton
04-06-2004 11:40 PM


Re: Two chapiters were made for Solomons Temple
Yeah, and I'm saying none of that matters....an entire aircraft carrier couldn't it...and somebody expects me to believe that this Noah dude built something BIGGER than an aircraft carrier all by himself?
This message is a reply to:
 Message 7 by johnfolton, posted 04-06-2004 11:40 PM johnfolton has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 9 by johnfolton, posted 04-07-2004 1:10 AM SRO2 has not yet responded

johnfolton 
Suspended Member (Idle past 3730 days)
Posts: 2024
Joined: 12-04-2005


Message 9 of 10 (98309)
04-07-2004 1:10 AM
Reply to: Message 8 by SRO2
04-06-2004 11:54 PM


Re: Two chapiters were made for Solomons Temple
Rocket, Noah had 120 years to build the ark, probably would of contracted some of the work, if you take the bible literally, they were giants in those days, and had iron and brass technology, though super sized boats are not limited to Noahs ark, whatabout the chinese building super large boats over 600 feet long, by compartmentalizing them, to strengthen them, thought as legend goes, they incorporated sails, ruled the south seas, this has already been discussed on this very forum, apparently its not all that hard to build a super large wooden vessel if one compartmentalizes, etc...

P.S. Its off topic, just thought I'd give you someone that not a creationists saying its not only possible, but that he believes the Chinese built boats larger than the ark, etc...

www.evcforum.net/cgi-bin/dm.cgi?action=page&f=7&t=90&p=6 -->www.evcforum.net/cgi-bin/dm.cgi?action=page&f=7&t=90&p=6">http://www.evcforum.net/cgi-bin/dm.cgi?action=page&f=7&t=90&p=6

Message 2 of 167 09-20-2002 01:50 PM


This message is a reply to:
 Message 8 by SRO2, posted 04-06-2004 11:54 PM SRO2 has not yet responded

Adminnemooseus
Director
Posts: 3881
Joined: 09-26-2002


Message 10 of 10 (98312)
04-07-2004 1:46 AM


Thread copied to the www.evcforum.net/cgi-bin/dm.cgi?action=page&f=1&t=236&p=6">10 cubits across and 30 cubits around thread in the The Bible: Accuracy and Inerrancy forum, this copy of the thread has been closed.
  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019