GakuseiDon

I've never understood why this was a problem. If the "them" in Matthew refers to the clothes, which DOES make sense in context, then there is no problem.

GakuseiDon

You're confusing "accuracy" with "precision".

Which of the following statements are true?

(1) "Pi" to 2 decimal places is 3.14
(2) "Pi" to 1 decimal places is 3.1
(3) "Pi" to 0 decimal places is 3

Amlodhi

To say that the disciples set Jesus upon the clothes as opposed to upon the asses, doesn't really solve the problem.

Mt. 21:7 [KJV] "And brought the ass, and the colt, and put on them their clothes, and they set him thereon."

Mt. 21:7 [AV] "They brought the donkey and the colt and laid their coats upon them, and He seated Himself on them [the coats]."

On which coats? The ones on the donkey or the ones on the colt?
If, as makes sense, Jesus intended to only ride one or the other, why did the disciples bother to put coats on both?

Further, it is primarily "Matthew's" apparent misunderstanding of Jewish literary parallelism which is of interest here. For someone who is presumably Jewish and writing for a Jewish audience, this is a curious misconstruction.

Zech. 9:9 [KJV] ". . . and riding upon an ass, and upon a colt the foal of an ass."

Here, in Zechariah, the ass and the colt are one and the same animal.

In Mt. 21:2, however, it is made clear that two separate animals are intended.

Mt. 21:2 ". . . ye shall find an ass tied, and a colt with her . . ."


Namaste'

Amlodhi

Weltall

Doesn't change the fact that a supposedly divine book gets Pi wrong. Pi is not 3 no matter how you want to get into semantics about precision.

GakuseiDon

The ones on the colt, but the only reason to think that is to match the context of the typology.

That is a good point, and shows a weakness in my explanation. Perhaps because the disciples didn't know which one Jesus wanted to ride? But then, what would Jesus riding both mean? I'm assuming that it made sense to Matthew somehow.

I should note that the Greek word "autos" can mean "it, he, she, them". It is translated as "her" in Mat 21:2. If it is "and put their clothes on it", then that would solve that problem.

I'm a total novice in ancient Greek, so I'd be interested in the comments of anyone with knowledge in that area.

Yes, THAT is the thing I don't understand. Why the assumption that Matthew got Zech wrong? Why can't Matthew talk about 2 animals, and Zechariah talk about one?

True, Matthew MAY have got Zech wrong, and so wrote in accordance to what he thought. But AFAICS, there is no reason to think this, except by assuming it in the first place. If we read the passage as is, then Zech talks about one animal, and Matthew talks about two. But so what? The typology is Jesus riding on the colt - the presence of another donkey, or the disciples, or the clothes for that matter, isn't relevent to that.

GakuseiDon

So, is the statement "Pi to 0 decimal places is 3" correct or incorrect? (Hint: "Incorrect" is the wrong answer)

It isn't a question of semantics, but mathematics. This "error" has to be one of the most ridiculous ones listed.

Goliath

I'm sorry, but the pool described allegedly has a circumference that is three times its diameter. The bible did not specify a number of decimal places, whence the authors of the bible assert that pi=3.

Sincerely,

Goliath

Goliath

Why is it ridiculous? Because it's one of the errors that is most easily shown to be irrefutably incorrect?

Sincerely,

Goliath

tracer

The "molten sea" you're talking about was described as being 10 cubits in diameter and 30 cubits in circumference. (c.f. 1 Kings 7:23 and 2 Chronicles 4:2)

If we assume that the folks writing Kings and Chronicles were rounding off the measurements to the nearest whole number -- the diameter could've been 9.7 cubits, which rounds to 10, and the circumference could've beel 30.47 cubits, which rounds to 30 -- then the authors were correct.

Godless Wonder

Because Matthew is generally believed to be later than Mark and Luke. In Mark, it says, regarding the colt (kjv):
No mention of an ass. And in Luke: Again, no mention of the ass. But Matthew: Matthew specifically inserts and asserts a prophecy fulfillment, but he's busted on insertion of the ass.

edit to add: Here's Zechariah for comparison: Pretty clear. But the weird thing is, it is clear that Matthew refers to 2 animals ("them") yet he still refers to Jesus riding them both simultaneously ("sitting upon an ass, and a colt") which is strange enough. Combine that with the clear similarity to the words of Zechariah 9:9, and it's pretty damning evidence.