1. Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Featured Mathematics, Divinity and the Bible

Discussion in 'General Religious Debates' started by Onoma, Jan 19, 2021.

  1. Onoma

    Onoma Active Member

    Joined:
    May 8, 2016
    Messages:
    575
    Ratings:
    +430
    Ah yes, three things destined to provoke ire when mentioned in the same sentence

    Right up my alley

    So, this thread is an offshoot from this thread:

    Why Didn't God Leave Huge Quantities of Secular Evidence For Jesus?

    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Right, so lets look at the fallacy in your thinking first, sub, since you seem to claim I am not able to use logic while at the same time invoking an informal fallacy in logic yourself

    Argument from incredulity, also known as argument from personal incredulity or appeal to common sense, is a fallacy in informal logic. It asserts that a proposition must be false because it contradicts one's personal expectations or beliefs, or is difficult to imagine

    Arguments from incredulity can take the form:

    1. I cannot imagine how F could be true; therefore F must be false.
    2. I cannot imagine how F could be false; therefore F must be true


    So, right off the bat, your argument is not even weak ( Hopefully you have something better to offer ). Personally, the 2nd preposition I cannot claim, because until I see some serious statistical analysis of what I will discuss in this thread, I retain some skepticism

    But let's move on to some math, since you think I don't know how to " apply math to reality "

    I claim that if the Bible is " divine ", and that if this is indeed demonstrable with mathematics, that in order for this to be taken as a valid statement,( " The Bible is divine " ) then " divinity " itself must first be rigorously defined

    Not just rigorously, but objectively defined

    Not only that, but it must be defined using traditions of priestly exegesis and not eisegesis ( numerology ) , so it must be based on actual traditions of literature from the period, and how divinity and math were related in literature in the antiquities

    Now, before I get started here, does anyone want to first debate whether or not mathematics and divinity were closely intertwined in ancient literature prior to the Torah appearing ?

    I understand that this is also a foreign concept to most ( The combining of sacerdotal literature, concepts of divinity and mathematics ), so I am willing to lay down a background for the discussion first, before we get to some math

    Let me know, I'll give this first opener some time, and if you decide to skip this offer, we can get right to it :)
     
    #1 Onoma, Jan 19, 2021
    Last edited: Jan 20, 2021
    • Informative Informative x 1
  2. Brian2

    Brian2 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2020
    Messages:
    2,056
    Ratings:
    +300
    Religion:
    Christian
    I have seen Josh McDowell put probability to prophecies that have come true and decide that it would be impossible for those prophecies to come true without a God and the Bible being authored by Him.
    I have heard someone talk about mathematics and the Hebrew letters in the Bible, but cannot remember it to explain it.
    I eagerly look forward to what you have to say.
     
  3. rational experiences

    rational experiences Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2020
    Messages:
    4,341
    Ratings:
    +175
    Religion:
    spiritualist
    O a circle maths principle.
    Time keeping counting began a long time ago.

    Time cycles and circles used.

    Time daylight natural in one space body 12
    No time 12 natural in one space body 12.

    No light just space.

    Why we died our spirit answer. Basic wisdom.
     
  4. Shadow Wolf

    Shadow Wolf Rival's Wife

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2005
    Messages:
    70,725
    Ratings:
    +27,121
    Religion:
    God is in the Rain
    Given it doesn't get the geometry of circle right, the Bible isn't good for math. Or really even the divine if a book is proven to be mathematical inaccurate.
     
    • Winner Winner x 4
  5. Heyo

    Heyo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2019
    Messages:
    5,907
    Ratings:
    +4,886
    Religion:
    none
    That's the second thread about maths in a short time.
    Are you so confident, already having people bamboozled about evolutionary biology, cosmogony and reality that you now think you can take up maths? I prophesize an epic fail.
     
    • Winner Winner x 3
    • Funny Funny x 1
  6. JoshuaTree

    JoshuaTree Flowers are red?

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2018
    Messages:
    648
    Ratings:
    +267
    Religion:
    Spiritual
    A treasure isn't a treasure if you know exactly where to dig, no matter how many times you dig it up, you get exactly what you are expecting.

    Matthew 13:44-46
    New International Version

    The Parables of the Hidden Treasure and the Pearl
    44 “The kingdom of heaven is like treasure hidden in a field. When a man found it, he hid it again, and then in his joy went and sold all he had and bought that field.

    45 “Again, the kingdom of heaven is like a merchant looking for fine pearls. 46 When he found one of great value, he went away and sold everything he had and bought it.
     
  7. blü 2

    blü 2 Well-Known Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2017
    Messages:
    7,594
    Ratings:
    +4,514
    Religion:
    Skeptical
    1. Around here they tend to take the simplified form
    What you say can't be right.
    Therefore what I say is right.

    Of course, in both cases, it's the form of the reasoning, not the independent soundness of the conclusion, that we're looking at.

    However, since posts here are like a conversation in many ways, I don't think you gain anything by accusing @Subduction Zone of something he wasn't trying to do viz present a formal argument. Instead he was getting straight to the point ─ if a formal argument is needed, it can come later.
    Pheeep! Offside!

    You said you were talking about reality ─ the world external to the self, nature, the realm of the physical sciences. So you have to define 'divinity' as an abstraction derived from real examples, in this case at least one god. What objective test will tell us whether any real suspect is God or not?
     
    • Like Like x 4
  8. Onoma

    Onoma Active Member

    Joined:
    May 8, 2016
    Messages:
    575
    Ratings:
    +430
    Erm, you're referring to the molten sea value of Pi, correct ?

    The approximation given is 3.1395348837

    "The Bible Says pi = 3"

    3 is an approximation of pi, just like 3.1395348837 is an approximation as is the current record of pi to 50 trillion digits is also an approximation

    Any value of pi is an approximation to a degree of accuracy, so not too sure what you what you mean when you say " doesn't get the geometry of the circle right " ( Can you clarify that for me ? )

    Might want to read this first:

    Approximations of π - Wikipedia.

    You seem to think that because it's not pi to some arbitrary degree of precision which you have yet to define ( Please do ) as a standard of " getting the geometry of the circle right " ( For me that's a meaningless statement, no offense )

    If this discussion of a "sea", or large bowl, had been referring to what is called an "ideal" bowl (a mathematical object, not existing in a physical sense, and having no thickness that could be felt or handled), then the text would indeed be claiming that the value of pi is 3

    But the text is referring to a real-world physical object, having the thick sidewalls necessary to support its own weight

    Lets look at what has been already pointed out about the Hebrew used in the verses describing this object:

    1 Kings 7:23 " And he made a molten sea, ten cubits from the one brim to the other: it was round all about, and his height was five cubits: and a line of thirty cubits did compass it round about "

    קו qav {kav} or קו qav {kawv} - line, ruler, cord, line, measuring-line

    This word, specifically referring to the device used to measure something, is polysemic ( Both Hebrew and Greek and polysemic and thus serve as numbers )

    In I Kings, the written word (ktiv) used for “diameter” is “קוה” (Kuf-Vav-Heh), which makes no sense in this context. By contrast, in Chronicles II, the word for diameter is spelled as “קָו” (Kuf-Vav), meaning “line.” However, according to the Mesorah (Masoretic tradition), the word in I Kings is read differently than it is written (kri)—it is read as קָו (Kuf-Vav), just as it is written in Chronicles II

    Rabbi Munk points out that the value of קוה (100+6+5) is 111 and the value of קו (100+6) is 106. He interpreted the ratio of these two values – 111/106 – as a correction factor: if you multiply the textual " implied " value for π (3) by this factor, you get 333/106 = 3.14150…– an approximation of π accurate to the fourth decimal point

    ( Diameter / diameter )*3 = 3.14150

    However, this is trivial, imo, for reason that all values given for pi are approximations

    Personally, I think you may have overlooked some things about the molten sea, they pertain to mathematical astronomy as practiced by priests, but I can debate this with you as well if you like
     
    • Informative Informative x 1
  9. Onoma

    Onoma Active Member

    Joined:
    May 8, 2016
    Messages:
    575
    Ratings:
    +430
    Okie dokie, we'll see how far your " prophecy " gets you ;)

    gary.png
     
  10. Joe W

    Joe W Always a godfather, never a god.

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2020
    Messages:
    2,277
    Ratings:
    +932
    Religion:
    None
    Sure. So, did you have that definition for 'divine' handy?
     
    • Like Like x 1
  11. Subduction Zone

    Subduction Zone Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2017
    Messages:
    38,242
    Ratings:
    +22,581
    Religion:
    Atheist
    Hold on a second there partner. I made no argument yet. I merely made an observation about a failed argument of yours. You were abusing math. Your so called argument simply wasn't. Do you really want that bit of drivel refugee? It can be done easily enough.

    By the way stating logical fallacies does not mean that you understand them or know how to apply them.

    Silly word games do not make for a proper argument. Try again. Numerology is merely woo woo for those that pretend to understand logic. There is no reliable evidence for it to date.

    Numerology - Wikipedia
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Creative Creative x 1
  12. Onoma

    Onoma Active Member

    Joined:
    May 8, 2016
    Messages:
    575
    Ratings:
    +430
    So lets consider Sub's statement " People cannot even begin to reason on how to mathematically prove the Bible "

    I'm going to go out on a limb here and assume he meant " mathematically prove the Bible ( is divine ) "

    First of all, who says people can't even begin to reason how ?

    This a claim ( The onus of proof is on Sub here, not I, just a reminder )

    Unless he or someone else can provide even a reasonable explanation of why this claim would be true, it can be discarded ( Let me know if you have a good reason why " nobody can even begin to reason ", I'd be all ears )

    I would say the exact opposite of Sub's claim is true, actually, that anybody can begin to reason ( Provided they have the ability to reason ). I don't know how far they'd get, but anybody can try

    So that's my response to that part of his claim

    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The next part, " mathematically prove the Bible ( is divine ) " is admittedly more difficult to approach

    Typically, when it comes to how people define " divinity ", it's all over the place, that's no secret

    There's no real objective definition for this concept, currently

    However, what is objectively true about " divinity " are several relevant historical facts ( Feel free to offer refutation ):

    1. Divinity in the NT ( Only ) ( Divine objects, places, people ) uses a specific notation that provides the nomina sacra ( sacred names )

    Nomina sacra - Wikipedia.

    In the scriptures, no less a figure than Jesus specifically mentions this notation for divinity

    " For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled. " Matthew 5:18

    keraía – properly, a little "horn," i.e. " 'a little hook, an apostrophe' on letters of the alphabet, distinguishing them from other like-letters, or a 'separation stroke' between letters" (Souter); a tittle (KJV).

    ["Tittle" comes from the Latin, titulus – the stroke above an abbreviated word – and later, any small mark.

    Strong's Greek: 2762. κεραία (keraia) -- a little horn

    All " nomina sacra " have a little " horn " ( Tittle )

    2. Divinity in pre-Biblical Mesopotamian literature also has a very specific notation:

    Dingir

    The concept of "divinity" in Sumerian is closely associated with the heavens, as is evident from the fact that the cuneiform sign doubles as the ideogram for "sky", and that its original shape is the picture of a star.

    The cuneiform sign by itself was originally an ideogram for the Sumerian word an ("sky" or "heaven"); its use was then extended to a logogram for the word diĝir ("god" or goddess)and the supreme deity of the Sumerian pantheon An, and a phonogram for the syllable /an/. Akkadian took over all these uses and added to them a logographic reading for the native ilum and from that a syllabic reading of /il/ ( ʼĒl )

    ʼĒl (also ʼIl or ʼÁl, Ugaritic: ; Phoenician: ;[1] Hebrew: אֵל‎; Syriac: ܐܠ‎; Arabic: إيل‎ or إله‎; cognate to Akkadian: , romanized: ilu) is a Northwest Semitic word meaning "god" or "deity"

    This symbol for divinity was written next to the names of deified priest-kings, just like a trademark symbol ( Known as a silent determinative )

    Determinative - Wikipedia

    The practice of writing Dingir next to the name of a priest-king started with Naram-Sin, who is also who standardized all measurements in Mesopotamia under one system using a theoretical cuboid of water as it's foundation ( I covered this in my thread on flood terminologies, but if you have questions, ask away )

    This can be read here, under " Classical system "

    Ancient Mesopotamian units of measurement - Wikipedia

    What this means is that the Judaic units in the Bible derive from the reformation under Naram-Sin, who is also the first person to claim to be " divine "

    Since we are going to discuss " divinity ", we might as well be rigorous and at least look at the first known example of the use of a divinity determinant in cuneiform script ( Naram-Sin )

    The reason, for me at least, is rather obvious, because the Bible directly borrows this earlier Mesopotamian concept of associating " stars " and " divinity "

    - " a star from Jacob " ( Prophecy )
    - " star of Bethlehem " ( Prophecy )
    - " The star was given the key to the shaft of the bottomless pit " ( Prophecy )
    - " there fell a great star from heaven " ( Prophecy )

    Dingir = ideogram of a star ( God / god )

    This also means that is cognate to the little " horn " ( Tittle ) of the NT nomina sacra

    They are both literary signifiers for " divinity "

    3. Divinity in pre-Biblical Egyptian texts also has a very specific type of notation

    The flag is a triliteral (nTr) often used to denote a god, goddess, or divinity in general



    --------------

    So all I've done here so far is point out that the NT as well as pre-Biblical literature in both cuneiform as well as Egyptian, had strict traditions of literary notations for " divinity " ( Since we need to establish whether or not these traditions have any relationship to mathematics )

    Bible = Tittle ( little " horn " )
    Cuneiform = Dingir
    Egyptian =
    nTr

    divinity.png



    Anybody have a problem with what I've presented in this post ? Please let me know



     
    #12 Onoma, Jan 20, 2021
    Last edited: Jan 20, 2021
    • Informative Informative x 3
    • Winner Winner x 1
  13. Onoma

    Onoma Active Member

    Joined:
    May 8, 2016
    Messages:
    575
    Ratings:
    +430
    Oh, yes sir :)

    Check my last post. I'm going to cover exactly how " divinity " is treated in both the Bible as well as pre-Biblical literature in both cuneiform and Egyptian scripts, but that post was getting rather lengthy and there's quite a bit of material to cover, so I cut it short

    I'm going to wait a few and see if anyone has any objections to the content of my last post before I continue on the subject
     
  14. Subduction Zone

    Subduction Zone Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2017
    Messages:
    38,242
    Ratings:
    +22,581
    Religion:
    Atheist
    Oh my, quite a bit of handwaving but that is about it.

    Wake me up if you can post something of substance.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  15. exchemist

    exchemist Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2018
    Messages:
    11,257
    Ratings:
    +10,308
    Religion:
    RC (culturally at least)
    You say "let's move onto some math" but there is no mathematics in this post.

    And you can't say that divinity and mathematics were closely entwined without first producing your "rigorous" definition of divinity and then some evidence of mathematics being "entwined" with it.

    If, however, all you mean is that some numbers had religious symbolism, well yes, we all know that but that is not "mathematics". Lots of things have religious symbolism, so having a few numbers involved is hardly unexpected.
     
  16. Onoma

    Onoma Active Member

    Joined:
    May 8, 2016
    Messages:
    575
    Ratings:
    +430
    Um, I'm about to do just that :)
     
  17. Onoma

    Onoma Active Member

    Joined:
    May 8, 2016
    Messages:
    575
    Ratings:
    +430
    Cool, let me know when you can demonstrate you're remotely familiar with literary traditions in the antiquities
     
  18. Subduction Zone

    Subduction Zone Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2017
    Messages:
    38,242
    Ratings:
    +22,581
    Religion:
    Atheist
    The literary techniques are besides the point. And I have a feeling that an actual expert would be laughing at your posts.

    Try to properly support your claims.
     
  19. exchemist

    exchemist Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2018
    Messages:
    11,257
    Ratings:
    +10,308
    Religion:
    RC (culturally at least)
    Yes. It's just wordy nonsense - and very likely barking mad.

    In order to prove mathematically the bible is divine, you need to express both the bible and the term "divine" as mathematical expressions and then show a mathematical relation between them that supports your claim.

    The bible, however is text, containing roughly 7.5 x 10⁶ words that express concepts which are qualitative in nature, i.e. not quantifiable. (For example, what is the mathematical expressions for: "Love your neighbour as yourself?)

    It is therefore impossible to capture the content of the bible in a mathematical expression. So however you may define "divine", one half of the required relationship cannot be expressed mathematically.
     
  20. Subduction Zone

    Subduction Zone Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2017
    Messages:
    38,242
    Ratings:
    +22,581
    Religion:
    Atheist
    It sounds to me as if he is working up to some version of the Bible Code:

    Bible code - Wikipedia

    The TLDR is one can use various algorithms to mine the Bible for words. But one can do that for any long book.
     
    • Informative Informative x 2
Loading...