tomorrow is march 14 (3.14), so its known as pi day, to honour the all-important constant.. incidentally, the bible has been criticized by mathematicians because the scriptures give a very poor value of pi.. the scripture is based on 1kings 7: 23 and reads as follows:.
"and he proceeded to make the molten sea ten cubits from its one brim to its other brim, circular all around; and its height was five cubits, and it took a line of thirty cubits to circle all around it".
now that shape is actually mathematically impossible to construct, because if the diameter is 10 cubits, the circumference would have to be 31.4159 cubits.
Happy pie day vs the weeping wall.
Conclusion (there are others): The Temple did not exist, nor did the Mikveh, nor does the weeping wall exist today. Or circles were not around back then or laws of geometry did not apply or they did not know how to make circular circles because smiddy is smart.
Or there is more to understand about the measurements recorded. (maybe below ????)
this guy, dale standridge, was the coordinator of the body of elders in the eureka east congregation in humboltd county california.
http://johnchiv.blogspot.com/2015/11/100000-bail-for-dale-standbridge.html?m=1.
it's not getting a lot of play in the press for some reason.
tomorrow is march 14 (3.14), so its known as pi day, to honour the all-important constant.. incidentally, the bible has been criticized by mathematicians because the scriptures give a very poor value of pi.. the scripture is based on 1kings 7: 23 and reads as follows:.
"and he proceeded to make the molten sea ten cubits from its one brim to its other brim, circular all around; and its height was five cubits, and it took a line of thirty cubits to circle all around it".
now that shape is actually mathematically impossible to construct, because if the diameter is 10 cubits, the circumference would have to be 31.4159 cubits.
"Beware the Ides of March!"
As a kid, I always figured that all pies were round, and sweet. I could not figure out why they called chicken pie, pie or pizza pie, pie. -or square pizza pie, pie? -Go figure!
however, i haven't found any evidence to support that belief.. have you?
if so please, show me the evidence that god exists, and i will believe along with you.. criteria:.
(1) you must specify which god you are talking about;.
however, i haven't found any evidence to support that belief.. have you?
if so please, show me the evidence that god exists, and i will believe along with you.. criteria:.
(1) you must specify which god you are talking about;.
in order to go pioneering.
Therefore, your presents mean something to me. I never knew until now that you were a JW
So when I admitted to having a basic education don't get the wrong idea.
Did you take debait when I underlined High School?
however, i haven't found any evidence to support that belief.. have you?
if so please, show me the evidence that god exists, and i will believe along with you.. criteria:.
(1) you must specify which god you are talking about;.
did you belong to the debating club in HS? I don't often agree with your POV , but your debating skills are most excellent. And that's no yolk! Really, kudos. Talis
Thank you Talis!! No, I never took debait in High School or on any basic level but Bobby Fisher did teach me how to play chess and I did take more than one science lab class in college and I studied for the LSAT, and more and HS (Holy Spirit) is what I always rely upon -not that it make any difference to the the subject matter which is the validity of my statement, the issue that I am discussing with cofty, and neither does cofty's basic education or posts expressing his emotions about my statement affect its validy either.
Do you agree in spite of our different POV?
however, i haven't found any evidence to support that belief.. have you?
if so please, show me the evidence that god exists, and i will believe along with you.. criteria:.
(1) you must specify which god you are talking about;.
That deserves a prize for the most lame contribution by a christian apologist.
Ok. But my statement stands.
And your assertion is false, Right?
Proof that God exists does not depend upon the evidence - Fishy
You misrepresent what I said by taking part of my statement out of context and posting only part of what I posted.
Right?
however, i haven't found any evidence to support that belief.. have you?
if so please, show me the evidence that god exists, and i will believe along with you.. criteria:.
(1) you must specify which god you are talking about;.
present objective evidence
Right, just as I stated the above condition: "Proof that God exists does not depend upon the evidence, but on the
rules of evidence, and ultimately upon who is trying the case -who has
the final say." which is not a moot point as you erroneous asserted. Correct?
however, i haven't found any evidence to support that belief.. have you?
if so please, show me the evidence that god exists, and i will believe along with you.. criteria:.
(1) you must specify which god you are talking about;.
That is a moot point since you are unable to provide evidence for anybody to judge
It is not a moot point, it is a qualifying condition. And since you(s) got to determine that my presents is not not satisfying, there is nothing more for me to say or show is there?
however, i haven't found any evidence to support that belief.. have you?
if so please, show me the evidence that god exists, and i will believe along with you.. criteria:.
(1) you must specify which god you are talking about;.
Proof that God exists does not depend upon the evidence, but on the rules of evidence, and ultimately upon who is trying the case -who has the final say.
