Sorry -- the message was sent accidently due to my fumble fingers. Try
again:
John Burgeson (Burgy)
www.burgy.50megs.com
Vernon wrote:
"I get the strong impression that this playful diversion is being
seriously regarded in some quarters as an effective counterpoise to the
emergence of 'pi' and 'e' (and much else) from the pages of scripture."
Yup. Just pulling your leg a little in these dog days of summer.
I think at least one of the reasons I don't put any credence in your
"finding" (there are other reasons, of course), is that the discovery
seems to have no consilience. That is -- it stands "ad hoc," connected in
no particular way to anything else.
I challenged you once before on a part of this -- your reliance of the
denary system, and observed that the denary system must be, by your own
arguments involving pi and e, somehow "divine." You replied (as I
remember) something to the effect (I don't keep messages, usually) that
"gee -- you are right -- the denary system MUST be somehow divine."
Correct me if my memory fails on the above.
The point I was making, of course, is not that the denary system is just
an accident of history; it may, indeed, be based on some other principle,
either scientific or divine. My point WAS, however, that you have not
shown this -- you have not connected the denary system's alleged divine
nature with anything else. There is no place in scripture, where, for
instance, Jesus (or some other authority) says "now children, counting in
the denary system, unlike those nasty Babylonians, is what God wants you
to do." Or anything close.
I suppose one COULD argue the divine correctness of the denary system
from natural theology -- but you have not even attempted to do that.
The formula you use to painfully extract approximations of pi and e from
the text -- this is also "ad hoc." Or can you tie it to something else,
to make it stand above and beyond the infinitude of other possible
mathematical formulae which might be used.
Finally -- the texts you use. Not being a Bible scholar, I don't know if
there are variant readings and / or spellings of these texts. If there
are, then your claim must also claim that THESE variants are divinely
inspired. But I'm on unfamiliar ground here, so I'll let that one be
John Burgeson (Burgy)
www.burgy.50megs.com
(science/theology, quantum mechanics, baseball, ethics,
humor, cars, God's intervention into natural causation, etc.)
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Jul 05 2001 - 13:16:15 EDT