Bible far ahead of ancient astronomers!

In article 1Tksf.407$Ff6.282@trnddc01,
says...
7000 year day? How about people who are maybe not astronomy experts but are
Biblical experts? The 24-hour day is interpreted out of context. They
were 7000 years each per Bible.

The bible is merely a story, you'll be believing Harry Potter next.
--
Craig Oldfield

Larry Wilson wrote:
I'm dropping this topic for now, but it was not me but Paul who intimated
the 7000 years in Hebrews. I'll e-mail you directly if you want to know
the scriptures involved with that interpretation, but it is not a new
interpretation and certainly not of my originality.

But of no matter, lots of people make errors because of not completely being
that expert in the field, the more presumptions are made the the greater the
error margin.

The word in Hebrew is unequivocally "yom" - day. "Yom Hadash". "Yom
Steim", "Yom Shalosh", etc. Day One, Day Two, Day Three. You can play
about with gematria all you like, you are not going to get the Hebrew
word for "day" to equal 7000 anything, despite what that recidivist
Paul was alleged to have claimed.

Eugene Griessel

Larry Wilson wrote:
modern experts in astronomy claim they know everything

Straw Man alert!

If that is not, as I believe it to be, an outright falsehood, please
cite one -- just one -- instance of a "modern expert in astronomy"
making that specific claim. The mere fact that "modern experts in
astronomy" conduct research gives the lie to your entirely inane
assertion.


From a previous post:
thought this was a "free speech" newgroup

It is not a "free speech" forum for off-topic drivel. Its charter states
specifically that it is "a forum for amateur and professional
astronomers to discuss astronomy within the UK". Note the last three
words. The charter continues to give a list of examples of suitable
topics. Surprising as it may seem to you, "religious kookery posing as
astronomical pseudohistory" is not amongst them.

Your drivel may be on-topic in alt.usenet.kooks, alt.kooky.scientists or
alt.****wits; it is off-topic here.

Remove footfrommouth to reply

--
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
+ Stephen Tonkin | ATM Resources; Astro-Tutorials; Astro Books +
+ (N51.162 E0.995) | http://astunit.com +
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +

wrote in message
ups.com...

You can play about with gematria all you like,
you are not going to get the Hebrew
word for "day" to equal 7000 anything,
despite what that recidivist Paul was
alleged to have claimed.
Eugene Griessel

You beat me to the punch. Yom, yes.
Yom, shlom ... Oi Veh!
---
TeaTime
Even a fish wouldn't get into trouble if it kept its mouth shut.

Larry Wilson wrote:
Oh, that's interesting. Seems to me even the Egytians and other had a grasp
of how to understand astronomy but perhaps did not transmit those ideas
effectively for us to understand and in the process of empires much
knowledge was lost, perhaps the knowledge of a few individuals who saw the
solar system at least as we do was lost.

Larry


It takes years and a lot of first hand experience to recognise why many
civilisations or rather the wise men of each civilisation never left
their wisdom in the hands of those who lose control very quickly or
rather by neccessity , kept their wisdom 'secret' if you will.

Real treasure is not anything material and neither is it knowledge,it
is the ability to appreceate a gift in another and how these gifts
emerge in tangible existence.

The genius of being a good parent far exceeds scraps of transitory
facts yet none of you here protect your children against an
indoctrination that can only destroy the appreceation of natural and
celestial phenomena.

Using the analogy of a traffic roundabout and cars travelling on
inside and outside lanes it becomes possible for teenagers to enjoy
Copernican heliocentricity by giving them a sense of the Earth's
orbital motion,not as a fact but as something real that they
participate in -

http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ima...2000_tezel.gif

Cataloguers spend all their time negating the Earth's motions with
their goto telescopes while heliocentric astronomers are making use of
the Earth's motions.

Btw,as far as Genesis is concerned,their is only one way to
mathematically approach the text and this was done over 120 years ago
by Julius Oppert in his 1877 presentation to the University of
Gottingen in the treatise 'Der Daten in Genesis'. Again,brute
mentalilties are unlikely to savor the intricacies of the Hebrew author
..




"Steve" wrote in message
...
Larry Wilson wrote:

Regardless of that, however, I just wanted to note that of all the
ancient historians commenting on astronomy, the Bible's description was
the most accurate and the oldest accurate concept, a credit to the Jews,
at least, for those who don't believe in God. I think that's quite
amazing.


Surely Hindu cosmology is the most accurate, in comparision to our modern
models. And Hinduism dates to something like 3000 BCE, Judaism 1700 BCE,
if we assume that Abraham and his descendents wrote the bible. AFAIK many
ancient societies (Stonehenge anyone) had a great grasp of "modern"
astronomy.

Steve

"Stephen Tonkin" wrote in message
...
Larry Wilson wrote:
modern experts in astronomy claim they know everything

Straw Man alert!

Got that right!

Your drivel may be on-topic in alt.usenet.kooks, alt.kooky.scientists or
alt.****wits; it is off-topic here.

alt.****wits must be running at the server limits.

Cheers,
Jim

To Eugene

The Hebrew scribe(s) positively exclude the possibility of rendering 'a
day' as anything other than the normal cycle of a day,again,a day in
Genesis as part of Gen 1 creation narrative or as part of the Gen 5 -
7 chronological/genealogical chain cannot be taken as anything other
than a day of 24 hours.

The Hebrew scribe introduces the formula - 'evening came morning
followed - the nth day' -

"Thus evening came, and morning followed--the first day."

http://www.usccb.org/nab/bible/genesis/genesis1.htm

The inspired will appreceate the overlap between day one and day two
while the dull will see nothing however the entire purpose of linking
one day to the other is between day six and day seven.

The creation of Adam on day six in Gen1 overlaps a day of the genealogy
in Gen 5,a genealogy which becomes precise in terms of days and weeks *
..

http://www.usccb.org/nab/bible/genesis/genesis5.htm

Again,good people can appreceate the subtleties and intricacies of the
Hebrew authors in the way they protected their texts from brute
interpretations such as the contemporary attempt to swamp the spiritual
purpose and intent with the creation ,genealogical or Noah's flood
narrative.It is impossible to pass on to another how so many different
strands are woven into a story with a flesh and blood core but like the
great Book Of Job,only those with heart as well as wisdom see these
glorius works for what they are.

AMDG







* "In the six hundredth year of Noah's life, in the second month, on
the seventeenth day of the month: it was on that day that All the
fountains of the great abyss .... On the precise day named,"

http://www.usccb.org/nab/bible/genesis/genesis7.htm

Thanks Oriel. Amazing! All I was really saying was a *flat* circle was
the consistent Biblical reference for those who felt a "circle" wasn't the
best reference for a sphere since a "circle" could apply to a flat surface
as well and thus was not necessarily proof that the Bible confirmed that
the earth was spherical and not flat. When one considers that the circle
or "circuit" was a reference to the flat orbit of the earth around the sun
this
becomes a moot point. But it seems a wasted point for the most part for
many
UK astronomy buffs. ??? What's the big deal?

Some of my grandparents come from England too, but I'm feeling a bit
disconnected of late (smile).

LarryW


"oriel36" wrote in message
oups.com...
To Eugene

The Hebrew scribe(s) positively exclude the possibility of rendering 'a
day' as anything other than the normal cycle of a day,again,a day in
Genesis as part of Gen 1 creation narrative or as part of the Gen 5 -
7 chronological/genealogical chain cannot be taken as anything other
than a day of 24 hours.

The Hebrew scribe introduces the formula - 'evening came morning
followed - the nth day' -

"Thus evening came, and morning followed--the first day."

http://www.usccb.org/nab/bible/genesis/genesis1.htm

The inspired will appreceate the overlap between day one and day two
while the dull will see nothing however the entire purpose of linking
one day to the other is between day six and day seven.

The creation of Adam on day six in Gen1 overlaps a day of the genealogy
in Gen 5,a genealogy which becomes precise in terms of days and weeks *
.

http://www.usccb.org/nab/bible/genesis/genesis5.htm

Again,good people can appreceate the subtleties and intricacies of the
Hebrew authors in the way they protected their texts from brute
interpretations such as the contemporary attempt to swamp the spiritual
purpose and intent with the creation ,genealogical or Noah's flood
narrative.It is impossible to pass on to another how so many different
strands are woven into a story with a flesh and blood core but like the
great Book Of Job,only those with heart as well as wisdom see these
glorius works for what they are.

AMDG







* "In the six hundredth year of Noah's life, in the second month, on
the seventeenth day of the month: it was on that day that All the
fountains of the great abyss .... On the precise day named,"

http://www.usccb.org/nab/bible/genesis/genesis7.htm

"Craig Oldfield" wrote in message
news:MPG.1e1c5511efbf007d989a7b@localhost...
In article 1Tksf.407$Ff6.282@trnddc01,

The bible is merely a story, you'll be believing Harry Potter next.
--
Craig Oldfield

It may very well be a "story", I'm not refuting that. I'm just saying
within the story it accurately describes the currently known facts about the
earth being around and rotating around the sun. A mythical text in an
astronomically correct context of note.

It makes a difference if God created a flat earth in six minutes rather than
a spherical orbiting earth in six minutes.

If the Bible said, "On the third day, I placed the earth upon the back of
the Great Universal Elephant" it would get more laughs than it stating "I
hung the earth upon nothing." You know, myth mixed with astronomical
correctness rather than 100% myth like the Greeks used about the flat earth
and Atlas and all that.

Larry

Hello Stephen,

I probably overstated here, but I had specifically in mind the renown expert
in ancient astronomy, Otto Neugebauer, who to his credit did acknowledge the
scientific possibility of a possible eclipse pattern recurring in the same
location that allowed for some predictability, but he did make this rather
conclusive statement:

"Neugebauer wrote [11]:-

.... there exists no cycle for solar eclipses visible at a given place: all
modern cycles concern the earth as a whole. No Babylonian theory for
predicting a solar eclipse existed at 600 BC, as one can see from the very
unsatisfactory situation 400 years later, nor did the Babylonians ever
develop any theory which took the influence of geographical latitude into
account. "


The above has been proven to be untrue by recent modern research using
computerized astronomy programs!

I was thus speaking of the general presumptions made by some experts about
certain things until proven incorrect as in this case. But point well
taken. I could have better said "many experts think" or "some experts
think."

Happy New Year to you!

Larry


"Stephen Tonkin" wrote in message
...
Larry Wilson wrote:
modern experts in astronomy claim they know everything

Straw Man alert!

If that is not, as I believe it to be, an outright falsehood, please cite
one -- just one -- instance of a "modern expert in astronomy" making that
specific claim. The mere fact that "modern experts in astronomy" conduct
research gives the lie to your entirely inane assertion.


From a previous post:
thought this was a "free speech" newgroup

It is not a "free speech" forum for off-topic drivel. Its charter states
specifically that it is "a forum for amateur and professional astronomers
to discuss astronomy within the UK". Note the last three words. The
charter continues to give a list of examples of suitable topics.
Surprising as it may seem to you, "religious kookery posing as
astronomical pseudohistory" is not amongst them.

Your drivel may be on-topic in alt.usenet.kooks, alt.kooky.scientists or
alt.****wits; it is off-topic here.

Remove footfrommouth to reply

--
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
+ Stephen Tonkin | ATM Resources; Astro-Tutorials; Astro Books +
+ (N51.162 E0.995) | http://astunit.com +
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +