> Likewise, the description of the temple
>furnishings in I Kings 7 refers to a round basin 30 cubits around and 10
>across, when a basin 10 cubits across should be 31.41592635389793238...
>cubits across, if you expect the precision of a modern geometry textbook
>from a 10th century B.C. description of cerimonial objects.
I would question the assumption here. It is quite possible for the
description of the bronze sea to be correct. This is from an old post of
mine.
***
>I don't know about the legislature, but the biblical reference is 2 Chr
>4:1-2, which says the "Bronze Sea" or laver in the courtyard of Solomon's
>Temple was 10 cubits "rim to rim" and 30 cubits in circumference. The
>ratio thus would be 3. The discrepancy from pi is generally explained by
>noting the rim to rim diameter was an internal measurement, while the
>circumference was external (so one could calculate the thickness of the
>laver). Or it might simply be round-off error.
>
I think the most ingenious solution to this issue was the one an acquaintance
suggested to me. If you note in 2 Chron 4:5 it says the rim was "...like a
cup, like a lily blossom." NIV
A lily is described as follows. "Members of the family usually have
six-segmented flowers and three-chambered capsular fruits;..." Encylcopedia
Britannica 1982, vol vi, p. 221
Using this, my friend suggested that the rim was not circular but hexagonal
because of the 6 petal reference. The circumference of a hexagon is exactly
3 times the diameter. This voids the criticism of a bunch of ignorant
Hebrews writing garbage.
***
I might add that it allows for a literal interpretation of this passage. And a
hexagon is roughly circular.
glenn
Foundation,Fall and Flood
http://members.gnn.com/GRMorton/dmd.htm