Freethought & Rationalism Archive

GakuseiDon · 03-30-2009, 01:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JaronK

So yes, the bible is wrong when it says pi equals 3... it should have said slightly more than 3, since that's rather critical to the usage of the number.

"Slightly more than 3"? Okay.

Actually, the Bible doesn't refer to Pi at all. If you are talking about the diameter and circumference of those baths in 1 Kings, they are given as 10 and 30 respectively. If using numbers rounded to the nearest integer, you can use pi=3.142 and still come out with the right result. Start with the diameter being 9.7, use pi=3.142 and round to whole numbers as required.

(ETA) This website has an interesting analysis: http://www.purplemath.com/modules/bibleval.htm

GakuseiDon · 03-30-2009, 02:09 PM

According to the following website on "kosher locusts":
http://encyclopedia.vbxml.net/Kosher_locusts

Sources in the Talmud

Tractate Chullin 59a, 65a-66b and Tractate Avodah Zara 37a

The Mishna states in Chullin:

"Any kind of grasshopper that has four walking legs, four wings, two jumping legs and whose wings cover the greater part of its body is kosher."

Toto · 03-30-2009, 04:18 PM

What does the Mishna have to do with this. other than recognizing the deficiency in the original Biblical law?

Minimalist · 03-30-2009, 04:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stinger

Quote:

Originally Posted by JaronK

I'd go with the one about how grasshoppers have 4 legs and pi = 3.

JaronK

Where is the passage stating that grasshoppers have four legs? My favorite is god stopping the sun from revolving around the earth, to extend the day, in order to allow Joshua to continue slaughtering the heathens.

One would think it would have been easier to invent the flare, wouldn't one?

Iskander · 03-30-2009, 05:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

What does the Mishna have to do with this. other than recognizing the deficiency in the original Biblical law?

http://www.fotosearch.com/UNF892/u23024998/

There is a video of grasshopper walking.

GakuseiDon · 03-30-2009, 05:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

What does the Mishna have to do with this. other than recognizing the deficiency in the original Biblical law?

It shows that people of that time talked about "four walking legs" and "two jumping legs". How does that recognize the deficiency in the original Biblical law? Is the Mishna wrong to say that grasshoppers have four walking legs and two jumping legs?

Kharakov · 03-30-2009, 06:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GakuseiDon

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kharakov

Actually, orthodox Judaic grasshoppers only walk upon the 4 small legs, holding the other 2 above the ground until they use them to jump.

Here's an orthodox Judaic locust (actually one from a locust plague in Palestine in 1915):

:lol:

Toto · 03-30-2009, 07:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GakuseiDon

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

What does the Mishna have to do with this, other than recognizing the deficiency in the original Biblical law?

It shows that people of that time talked about "four walking legs" and "two jumping legs". ...

When do you date the Mishna? It is not just trying to justify the wording in Leviticus? Did anyone ever talk about "four walking legs" versus two jumping legs that were also used for walking, unless they were trying to make the Bible inerrant?

GakuseiDon · 03-30-2009, 07:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

Quote:

Originally Posted by GakuseiDon

It shows that people of that time talked about "four walking legs" and "two jumping legs". ...

When do you date the Mishna? It is not just trying to justify the wording in Leviticus?

The Mishnah is evidence that they talked about grasshoppers as having "four walking legs" and "two jumping legs", which is consistent with the Bible. It is dated around 200 CE.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

Did anyone ever talk about "four walking legs" versus two jumping legs that were also used for walking, unless they were trying to make the Bible inerrant?

I suppose it is possible that that passage in the Mishnah was written around 200 CE to try to make the Bible inerrant.

PhilosopherJay · 03-30-2009, 09:40 PM

Here is a passage that has at least four illogical aspects to it.
1. a donkey talks in it, and Balaam doesn't find it strange.
2. The angels criticize Balaam for getting angry at a disobedient donkey that wouldn't go in the direction he was ordered to, crushed his foot, and laid down under him. Balaam's reaction was perfectly understandable. The angel's criticism of Balaam's treatment of the donkey is senseless because Balaam had no way of knowing that the donkey was being protective rather than willful and disobedient.
3. Balaam says that he has sinned because he got mad at his donkey. How is getting mad at a donkey a sin?
4. A donkey is able to thwart God's plan to assassinate Balaam.

Numbers 22:

Quote:

22 Then God's anger was aroused because he went, and the Angel of the Lord took His stand in the way as an adversary against him. And he was riding on his donkey, and his two servants were with him. 23 Now the donkey saw the Angel of the Lord standing in the way with His drawn sword in His hand, and the donkey turned aside out of the way and went into the field. So Balaam struck the donkey to turn her back onto the road. 24 Then the Angel of the Lord stood in a narrow path between the vineyards, with a wall on this side and a wall on that side. 25 And when the donkey saw the Angel of the Lord, she pushed herself against the wall and crushed Balaam's foot against the wall; so he struck her again. 26 Then the Angel of the Lord went further, and stood in a narrow place where there was no way to turn either to the right hand or to the left. 27 And when the donkey saw the Angel of the Lord, she lay down under Balaam; so Balaam's anger was aroused, and he struck the donkey with his staff. 28 Then the Lord opened the mouth of the donkey, and she said to Balaam, "What have I done to you, that you have struck me these three times?" 29 And Balaam said to the donkey, "Because you have abused me. I wish there were a sword in my hand, for now I would kill you!" 30 So the donkey said to Balaam, "Am I not your donkey on which you have ridden, ever since I became yours, to this day? Was I ever disposed to do this to you?" And he said, "No." 31 Then the Lord opened Balaam's eyes, and he saw the Angel of the Lord standing in the way with His drawn sword in His hand; and he bowed his head and fell flat on his face. 32 And the Angel of the Lord said to him, "Why have you struck your donkey these three times? Behold, I have come out to stand against you, because your way is perverse before Me. 33 The donkey saw Me and turned aside from Me these three times. If she had not turned aside from Me, surely I would also have killed you by now, and let her live." 34 And Balaam said to the Angel of the Lord, "I have sinned, for I did not know You stood in the way against me. Now therefore, if it displeases You, I will turn back." 35 Then the Angel of the Lord said to Balaam, "Go with the men, but only the word that I speak to you, that you shall speak." So Balaam went with the princes of Balak.

Warmly,

Philosopher Jay

03-30-2009, 02:09 PM	#22
GakuseiDon Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Australia Posts: 5,714	According to the following website on "kosher locusts": http://encyclopedia.vbxml.net/Kosher_locusts Sources in the Talmud Tractate Chullin 59a, 65a-66b and Tractate Avodah Zara 37a The Mishna states in Chullin: "Any kind of grasshopper that has four walking legs, four wings, two jumping legs and whose wings cover the greater part of its body is kosher."

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

03-30-2009, 04:18 PM	#23
Toto Contributor Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: Los Angeles area Posts: 40,549	What does the Mishna have to do with this. other than recognizing the deficiency in the original Biblical law?

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.