YHWHtruth

At 1_Kings 7:23 and 2_Chronicles 4:2 we are told that the circular molten sea in the courtyard of Solomon’s temple was ten cubits from brim to brim and that “it took a line of thirty cubits to circle all around it.”

Show us the error Arken

Max

Arken

Well, last I checked, that would make pi=3. I'm not going to do your math for you.

Duck!

This particular biblical inconsistency hasn't really bothered me.

If a perfectly circular construction has a diameter of 10 cubits, then the circumference would be 31.415 cubits, not 30 cubits.

But that's assuming that it really is an exact circle and that the units haven't been rounded off to the nearest cubit.

So I don't think this is a really valid proof of biblical error.

It may just be a roughly accurate description of a construction.


Duck!

Arken

Okay, admittedly it doesn't bother me either... however the whole rabbits chewing cuds, bats being birds, etc. I have problems with.

Magus55

Bats aren't called birds, they are called fowls - and in the context, fowl refers to anything with wings - not what we would necessarily classify as a bird. I hardly consider that a valid biblical error - its just a generic term for a large range of animals with similar characteristics.

Strong's for fowl:

1) flying creatures, fowl, insects, birds

a) fowl, birds

b) winged insects


Bats do fall under the flying creature category.

YHWHtruth

The Scriptural reference to the hare as a cud chewer has frequently been doubted by some critics of the Bible. (Le 11:4,_6; De 14:7) It should not be overlooked, however, that the modern, scientific classification of what constitutes chewing of the cud provides no basis for judging what the Bible says, as such classification did not exist in the time of Moses. Even in the 18th century, English poet William Cowper, who had at length observed his domestic rabbits, commented that they “chewed the cud all day till evening.” Linnaeus, famed naturalist of the same century, believed that rabbits chewed the cud. But it remained for others to supply more scientific data. Frenchman Morot discovered in 1882 that rabbits reingest up to 90 percent of their daily intake. Concerning the hare, Ivan T._Sanderson in a recent publication remarks: “One of the most extraordinary [habits], to our way of thinking, is their method of digestion. This is not unique to Leporids [hares, rabbits] and is now known to occur in many Rodents. When fresh green food, as opposed to desiccated [dried] winter forage, is available, the animals gobble it up voraciously and then excrete it around their home lairs in a semi-digested form. After some time this is then re-eaten, and the process may be repeated more than once. In the Common Rabbit, it appears that only the fully grown adults indulge this practice.” Living Mammals of the World, 1955, p. 114.

Certain British scientists of this century made close observations of the rabbits’ habits under careful controls, and the results they obtained were published in the Proceedings of the Zoological Society of London, 1940, Vol. 110, pp. 159-163. Briefly this is the way the hare reingests its food: If a rabbit eats a breakfast of fresh food, it passes through the stomach into the small intestine, leaving behind in the cardiac end of the stomach some 40 or 50 grams of pellets that were already present when the fresh food was eaten. From the small intestine the morning meal enters the caecum or blind end of the large intestine and there remains for a period of time. During the day the pellets descend, and in the intestines the bacterial protein in them is digested. When they reach the large intestine they bypass the material in the caecum and go on into the colon where the excess moisture is absorbed to produce the familiar dry beans or droppings that are cast away. This phase of the cycle completed, the material stored in the dead end of the caecum next enters the colon, but instead of having all the moisture absorbed it reaches the anus in a rather soft condition. It is in pellet form with each coated with a tough layer of mucus to prevent them from sticking together. Now when these pellets reach the anus, instead of being cast away, the rabbit doubles up and takes them into the mouth and stores them away in the cardiac end of the stomach until another meal has been eaten. In this way the special rhythmic cycle is completed and most of the food has passed a second time through the digestive tract.

Dr._Waldo L._Schmitt, Head Curator, Department of Zoology of the Smithsonian Institution, Washington,_D.C., in commenting on these findings, wrote: “There seems to be no reason to doubt the authenticity of the reports of various workers that rabbits customarily store semi-digested food in the caecum and that this is later reingested and passes a second time through the digestive tract.” He also observed that here is an explanation for “the phenomenally large caecum of rabbits as compared with most other mammals

The hare was prohibited as food under the Law given through Moses and is referred to as a chewer of the cud. (Le 11:4,_6; De 14:7) Hares and rabbits, of course, do not have a multichambered or multiparted stomach and do not regurgitate their food for rechewing, which characteristics are associated with the scientific classification of ruminants or cud chewers. Nevertheless, although the Hebrew term here used for chewing literally means “bringing up,” the modern scientific classification was not the basis for what the Israelites in Moses’ day understood ‘cud chewing’ to be. Hence, there is no foundation for judging the accuracy of the Bible statement by the restricted, relatively recent conception of what constitutes a cud-chewing animal, as done by many critics.

In the past, commentators with faith in the inspiration of the Bible record saw no error in the statement of the Law. Observed The Imperial Bible-Dictionary: “It is obvious that the hare does in repose chew over and over the food which it has some time taken; and this action has always been popularly considered a chewing of the cud. Even our poet Cowper, a careful noticer of natural phenomena, who has recorded his observations on the three hares which he had domesticated, affirms that they ‘chewed the cud all day till evening.’”Edited by P._Fairbairn, London, 1874, Vol. I, p. 700.

Scientific observation of hares and rabbits in more recent years, however, indicates that even more than seeming cud chewing is involved. Writes François Bourlière (The Natural History of Mammals, 1964, p._41): “The habit of ‘refection,’ or passing the food twice through the intestine instead of only once, seems to be a common phenomenon in the rabbits and hares. Domestic rabbits usually eat and swallow without chewing their night droppings, which form in the morning as much as half the total contents of the stomach. In the wild rabbit refection takes place twice daily, and the same habit is reported for the European hare._._._. It is believed that this habit provides the animals with large amounts of B vitamins produced by bacteria in the food within the large intestine.” On the same point, the work Mammals of the World (by E._P. Walker, 1964, Vol. II, p. 647) notes: “This may be similar to ‘chewing the cud’ in ruminant mammals.

Max

Calzaer

So what you're saying is... *drum roll*... the Bible is outdated and/or obsolete.

Thanks for proving our point for us.

Magus55

No, I think he is saying the Bible isn't a biology book that attempts to use taxonomy to classify everything into very specific categories. It uses general categories to get the point across.

gravitybow

What was God thinking of when he dreamed this one up?
(This is a good design becauuuuse...? )

Arken

Boy, you'd think that a book dictated by an omniscient being might be more specific...

Especially since he supposedly created the taxonomy in the first place.