well, i think the rod is marked for one cubit. but, the description was not made to give an exact proportional account of the Temple. so in all fairness, he is allowed to approximate the circumference and dimensions of the design. i would agree that 31 and 32 would be a "better" approximation, but it is still an approximation. so, if the author wishes to use 30 (which is proven to be an accurate approximation) it is valid. i'm sorry, i don't quite undersand your question. it does equal 300 gourds. since there is 10 gourds in a cubit and there is 30 cubits round about; so there is 300 gourds. now, the problem is that we do not know the size of the gourd being described. their diameter can be 1/10 of a cubit per gourd or smaller than that. so, if the gourds were smaller than 1/10 of a cubit then it would not be an accurate to count the gourds to approximate the circumference of the object. so, i presume that the author used a rope/line of some kind to do the measurement. yes. but nirvana prove to us that it is more than a mere 3.14. i can only memorized pi up to it 5th digits. lol. it works for me when i don't have a calculator.
You really don't have to make the font so tiny... <_< Anyways, so how can one tell, when one's reading the bible, which part is approximation and which part is accurate? Because we now know that pi = 3.14... and not 3 (as SHOWN in this passage) we can claim the passage is an approximation, how about other instances? When one cannot tell whether the description is ACCURATE nor APPROXIMATE, we shall take Bible's word for it? -huh
lol if you label one thing in the bible as an approximation then it calls everything else in there into question. the bible is the word of god and god does not approximate.
i'm sorry, is this better? I don't think you quite understand. It is the context of this text being written. It isn't an engineer giving out a geometrically exact point-by-point description of the Temple. No, it is an eye-witness giving an account of the Temple that was build during his time. It is like if I took you to a new model-home. We look around and I state that this home is probably around 5,400 square-feet (by using some simple measurement methods). Are you going to claim that since I didn't state the exact square-foot of the home, then all of the my next and future statements are invalid and questionable? Hopefully not. So, in the same aspect, lets treat this account in the same fashion. Now, one could claim that since we are "loosely" treating this passage wouldn't the Bible be inaccurate in its other similar measurement accounts (ie Noah's ark, etc)? Well, no. if the other passages are similar to this same example, then yes we can probably treat it as an eye-witness overview of an particular event that is happening during that time. However, not all "measurements" given in the Bible are given in that type of view. There are examples and passages that clearly shows that the exact measurement needed or provided by God. Therefore, those cannot be treated as "loose" approximation and one should not assume that the viewpoint or explanation is generalized. All in all, it is the historical and literal context the passage should be taken into considerance before jumping to conclusion. ^ hopefully, this addresses fearless_fx's point.
But you are human and God is God. God doesn't do approximations or estimates since He "knows" everything.
