1 Kings 7: 23 & 2 Chronicles 4: 2
The ancient Egyptians and Babylonians had pi more correctly at 3.14.
2006-07-02 09:37:47 · 16 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
If you factor in what I call the "holy fudge-factor," I'd say 3 is pretty close.
As some modern biblical "explanations" say, a day in Genesis is somewhere around 2 billion years, which is about 730,000,000,000 days. So I think we got off lucky with Pi.
2006-07-02 09:47:34 · answer #1 · answered by JAT 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
It is sometimes claimed that the Bible states that π = 3, based on a passage in 1 Kings 7:23 giving measurements for a round basin as having a 10 cubit diameter and a 30 cubit circumference. Rabbi Nehemiah explained this by the diameter being from outside to outside while the circumference was the inner brim; but it may suffice that the measurements are given in round numbers. Also, the basin may not have been exactly circular.
2006-07-02 09:49:36 · answer #2 · answered by vanilla_d_i_v_a 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No, the Bible doesn't give the value of Pi, it gives the measurements of a tub, and says that it was 30 cubits around and ten cubits from one brim to the other. Now, if it was exactly 10 cubits from one end to the other, then it should have been about 31.4 cubits around. The arguement then follows that since these arne't the numbers given, the text must be wrong. But this assumes that the text was given by calculating the circumfrance of the tub. What if it was exactly 30 cubits around? How wide would it have been? 9.54 cubits. That's almost 10. If we're only counting to the closest cubit, then it's exactly 30 cubits around and about 10 cubits across. What if it was 30.25 cubits around, then how wide would it be? 9.70. Then, again measuring to the closest cubit it's about 10 cubits across and about 30 around. I think the numbers given were measured, not calculated, and I actually think the numbers were given to the closest 5 cubits, not even the closest cubit. There's only a few numbers in those chapter that aren't multiples of five. But even if they were to the nearest cubit, it still works.
2006-07-02 09:55:10 · answer #3 · answered by Sifu Shaun 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Those are a statement of what it took, not measurements. I don't think their cubits were precise, but more like saying "it took about 30 stones to go around it, and each stone was about so long". I think it was all rough estimating, and therefore was *less* accurate, not more. Those verses are saying what the writer saw, and is not any sort of mathmatical calculation.
2006-07-02 09:43:44 · answer #4 · answered by b30954 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Dude, many of the people here are not going to get the math it would take to understand what you are trying to say.
Those that do... well, I don't feel like dragging out the calculator and plugging those numbers into an equation at the moment.
2006-07-02 09:41:00 · answer #5 · answered by Snark 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
For God so loved the world, that He gave his only begotten Son, so that whosoever believeth in Him should not perish, but have everlasting life. John 3:16
2006-07-02 09:40:22 · answer #6 · answered by Jimmy Pete 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
they were rounding to a whole number
the Mishnah ( a Jewish writing) that was passed down orally records a much more accurate number for Pi.
2006-07-02 09:48:36 · answer #7 · answered by Gamla Joe 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I'm not sure, but it would definitely make math class easier! (Though wholly inaccurate)
Back to your question:
I believe that in order to save space and all, the bible simply used round numbers.
2006-07-02 09:41:12 · answer #8 · answered by LZ1980 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Whaaaaaaaat?
2006-07-02 09:41:59 · answer #9 · answered by Who am I? 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Personally I like apple pie. Where is that in the bible?
2006-07-02 09:40:19 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋