How did the Hebrews know?

**~~Mifletz~~** · 2001-Oct-24, 08:56 PM

The best astronomer of his day ,Hipparchus, said there were 1022 stars. Ptolemy said there were 1026. Yet 1700 years before them God told Abraham that the stars are innumerable. Interestingly the Talmud states on the verse in Isaiah 49 "And Zion says the Lord has forsaken me" that "God says I have created for you 12 zodiacal signs in the heavens; for each sign 30 armies of stars; for each army 30 legions; for each legion 30 battalions; for each battalion 30 cohorts; for each cohort 30 phalanxes; and for each cohort 365,000 times 10,000 of stars. How can you say I have forsaken you?". This works out at about 10^19 stars. Isn't the latest estimate that there are 10^8 galaxies each with 10^11 stars ie. 10^19? How did the Hebrews know this?

**Mr. X** · 2001-Oct-24, 09:21 PM

Oh no! Not again! It begins...

**ToSeek** · 2001-Oct-24, 09:41 PM

On 2001-10-24 16:56, Mifletz wrote:
The best astronomer of his day ,Hipparchus, said there were 1022 stars. Ptolemy said there were 1026. Yet 1700 years before them God told Abraham that the stars are innumerable. Interestingly the Talmud states on the verse in Isaiah 49 "And Zion says the Lord has forsaken me" that "God says I have created for you 12 zodiacal signs in the heavens; for each sign 30 armies of stars; for each army 30 legions; for each legion 30 battalions; for each battalion 30 cohorts; for each cohort 30 phalanxes; and for each cohort 365,000 times 10,000 of stars. How can you say I have forsaken you?". This works out at about 10^19 stars. Isn't the latest estimate that there are 10^8 galaxies each with 10^11 stars ie. 10^19? How did the Hebrews know this?

Two comments:

1. There are a lot more than 10^8 galaxies.
2. If there were only, say, 10,000 stars, then you'd just say the "innumerable" statement was just a figure of speech (which is was), as are many other literally inaccurate statements in the Bible. So you win either way.

**Azpod** · 2001-Oct-24, 09:50 PM

In case anyone was tempted to waste time on a reply, don't forget this simple rule of life:

Don't feed the trolls.

[img]/phpBB/images/smiles/icon_smile.gif[/img]

**Phobos** · 2001-Oct-24, 10:20 PM

On 2001-10-24 17:50, Azpod wrote:
In case anyone was tempted to waste time on a reply, don't forget this simple rule of life:

Don't feed the trolls.

[img]/phpBB/images/smiles/icon_smile.gif[/img]

Thats a bit harsh isn't it. On the old board a contentious posting ran the risk of hogging the board but on this one the only thing he may end up hogging is his own thread.

I don't believe you can just site examples from a particular religion where there seems to be some correlation with current scientific understandings without also taking into account the examples where what is stated/implied is clearly false.

Of the religions that are popular today, I am not aware of a single one which can site ancient knowledge of a spherical Earth. In actual fact most seem to refer to our planet in "flat" terms (heaven being above the surface, hell being below).

Jeff

**Ben Benoy** · 2001-Oct-25, 02:47 AM

On 2001-10-24 16:56, Mifletz wrote:
The best astronomer of his day ,Hipparchus, said there were 1022 stars. Ptolemy said there were 1026. Yet 1700 years before them God told Abraham that the stars are innumerable. Interestingly the Talmud states on the verse in Isaiah 49 "And Zion says the Lord has forsaken me" that "God says I have created for you 12 zodiacal signs in the heavens; for each sign 30 armies of stars; for each army 30 legions; for each legion 30 battalions; for each battalion 30 cohorts; for each cohort 30 phalanxes; and for each cohort 365,000 times 10,000 of stars. How can you say I have forsaken you?". This works out at about 10^19 stars. Isn't the latest estimate that there are 10^8 galaxies each with 10^11 stars ie. 10^19? How did the Hebrews know this?

Just a quibble: it is only very approximately 1019 stars. 12*305*365,000*10,000 = 1.06 * 1018. Oops.

Also, I looked up Isaiah 49, and found in verse 14 the thing about Zion and forsaking, but nothing about stars and cohorts etc. (Bible Gateway) So I looked elsewhere in the OT, but it seems to be nowhere. What gives? Please don't tell me that you're citing non-existent Bible passages to almost correlate with current observations. Or is it that you're quoting the Gemara? What gives here?

Ben Benoy

People, can't live with 'em, can't shoot 'em. [img]/phpBB/images/smiles/icon_biggrin.gif[/img]

(Fixed some superscripts, some punctuation, and added a smiley so I didn't look crazy...)

[ This Message was edited by: Ben Benoy on 2001-10-24 23:32 ]

**Mr. X** · 2001-Oct-25, 03:33 AM

Hehe, can't fool Ben with non-existing stuff. That guy's actually pretty sharp about all that!

I am the lead poster with 44 posts by the way. [img]/phpBB/images/smiles/icon_smile.gif[/img]

**Ben Benoy** · 2001-Oct-25, 04:24 AM

Must... catch... Mr... X...

[img]/phpBB/images/smiles/icon_smile.gif[/img]

At one point I had 22%. Yikes!

**Peter B** · 2001-Oct-25, 05:54 AM

Folks

Remember that Mifletz is quoting the Talmud, not the Bible. Presumably, in this context, he's quoting a commentary on the Book of Isaiah, although I accept I know nothing about the Talmud.

My little encyclopedia says of the Talmud that it contains "...a wealth of traditional wisdom, legends and stories, comment on the Old Testament and records of early legal decisions."

In my opinion, that makes it a very human, and hardly a God-inspired, collection of writings.

**Kaptain K** · 2001-Oct-25, 11:17 AM

I am the lead poster with 44 posts by the way. [img]/phpBB/images/smiles/icon_smile.gif[/img]

Well, considering that on another thread, you replied to yourself 4 times, it would appear that you are padding your count. The BA has indicated that this is frowned upon. [img]/phpBB/images/smiles/icon_rolleyes.gif[/img]

**Karl** · 2001-Oct-25, 11:59 AM

On 2001-10-25 07:17, Kaptain K wrote:

Well, considering that on another thread, you replied to yourself 4 times, it would appear that you are padding your count. The BA has indicated that this is frowned upon. [img]/phpBB/images/smiles/icon_rolleyes.gif[/img]

If Mifletz doesn't start replying he's going to be frowned upon also. . .

[ This Message was edited by: Karl on 2001-10-25 08:01 ]

**Lisa** · 2001-Oct-25, 01:37 PM

If Mifletz doesn't start replying he's going to be frowned upon also. .

Did you think things would change just because of new board software?
Lisa

**Sean** · 2001-Oct-25, 01:44 PM

IS there a current estimate on how many galaxies are out there? Or how many Stars Each Galaxy will contain?

**Mr. X** · 2001-Oct-25, 02:15 PM

On 2001-10-25 07:17, Kaptain K wrote:

I am the lead poster with 44 posts by the way. [img]/phpBB/images/smiles/icon_smile.gif[/img]

Well, considering that on another thread, you replied to yourself 4 times, it would appear that you are padding your count. The BA has indicated that this is frowned upon. [img]/phpBB/images/smiles/icon_rolleyes.gif[/img]

HEY HEY HEY! I only replied to myself because I wanted to add more information that I didn't want to fit on my previous post! And it's not MY FAULT we happen to be just two people talking in that thread!

Not putting it in the same post forces the other guy to read it, as nobody cares if I edited a typo or not. And since we're only two people, I don't want him to go over it.

Thst settles that. Needless to say, I am very [img]/phpBB/images/smiles/icon_cool.gif[/img] [b]cool[b] [img]/phpBB/images/smiles/icon_cool.gif[/img]

**Rob Scott** · 2001-Oct-25, 03:32 PM

Wasn't Mifletz banned from the old board? I guess he will be here as soon as the BA realizes he's back...

**ToSeek** · 2001-Oct-25, 04:20 PM

On 2001-10-25 09:44, Sean wrote:
IS there a current estimate on how many galaxies are out there? Or how many Stars Each Galaxy will contain?

According to the sci.astro faq (http://www.faqs.org/faqs/astronomy/faq/part8/index.html), the Hubble Deep Field image indicates that HST could detect 80 billion galaxies (8x10^10) and there are about 400 billion stars (4x10^11) in the Milky Way. So there are at least 3x10^22 stars in the universe.

[ This Message was edited by: ToSeek on 2001-10-25 12:21 ]

**Mr. X** · 2001-Oct-25, 04:28 PM

On 2001-10-25 11:32, Rob Scott wrote:
Wasn't Mifletz banned from the old board? I guess he will be here as soon as the BA realizes he's back...

I don't think he was ever banned. This is maddening (uh, spelling)! At least it doesn't disrupt everything like in the old board.

**CJSF** · 2001-Oct-25, 06:03 PM

Something about this has been bugging me. I have been mulling it over all day, between processing satellite images...

****IF**** one was to take the Bible 100% literally, then there is a paradox related to some literalists' claims that the "End Times" are nigh upon us.

"Scripture" tells us that God PROMISED both sons of Abraham would have descendants numbering the same as the stars in the sky or sands on the seashore. In order to fulfill this promise, the total number of people decendend from Isaac OR Ishmael would have to equal those numbers...

I think the best estimates for TOTAL human population EVER to have existed on Earth is between 85 and 150 billion people. (This, is of course, very fuzzy. Literalists would claim that Creation is about 6000 years old, so by that standard, the number of people who ever lived would be even smaller - MUCH smaller.)

In any evet, that's TOTAL population... NOT just the genetic OR religious descendants of Abraham.

100 billion is 10^11... 100,000,000 times SMALLER than 10^19.

So we would seem to have quite a ways to go before the "End Times", **IF** one takes the Bible as literal... otherwise God will have reneged on his promise to Abraham.

CJSF
Matthew 24:36

**Ben Benoy** · 2001-Oct-25, 07:09 PM

On 2001-10-25 01:54, Peter B wrote:
Folks

Remember that Mifletz is quoting the Talmud, not the Bible. Presumably, in this context, he's quoting a commentary on the Book of Isaiah, although I accept I know nothing about the Talmud.

If he's quoting from the Mishnahs, from my understanding this is basically just the Hebrew bible. Then I should have found it. If he was quoting from the commentaries, then who cares? I don't think anybody says that the commentaries were also written by God. (Not Jewish, correct me if I'm wrong.)

Ben

2001-Oct-25, 07:45 PM

on the verse in Isaiah 49 "And Zion says the Lord has forsaken me" that "God says I have created for you 12 zodiacal signs in the heavens; for each sign 30 armies of stars; for each army 30 legions; for each legion 30 battalions; for each battalion 30 cohorts; for each cohort 30 phalanxes; and for each cohort 365,000 times 10,000 of stars. How can you say I have forsaken you?". This works out at about 10^19 stars. ---
Okay, so that was a prophesy as too how many stars existed in the universe. They hadn't seen them all yet.

---Isn't the latest estimate that there are 10^8 galaxies each with 10^11 stars ie. 10^19? How did the Hebrews know this?

---

Okay, so this is an estimate of how many stars can be seen or otherwise inferred with our new instruments NOW. When we get stronger instruments, we will see more stars. Your correlation only corresponds to the extent of beliefs of two different cultures at two different times. There is nothing "unchanging" or "fundamental" about the number of stars that are believe to exist. In the future, we may surpass those estimates of star number.

**Azpod** · 2001-Oct-25, 08:26 PM

On 2001-10-25 14:03, Christopher Ferro wrote:
Something about this has been bugging me. I have been mulling it over all day, between processing satellite images...

****IF**** one was to take the Bible 100% literally, then there is a paradox related to some literalists' claims that the "End Times" are nigh upon us.

"Scripture" tells us that God PROMISED both sons of Abraham would have descendants numbering the same as the stars in the sky or sands on the seashore. In order to fulfill this promise, the total number of people decendend from Isaac OR Ishmael would have to equal those numbers...

I think the best estimates for TOTAL human population EVER to have existed on Earth is between 85 and 150 billion people. (This, is of course, very fuzzy. Literalists would claim that Creation is about 6000 years old, so by that standard, the number of people who ever lived would be even smaller - MUCH smaller.)

In any evet, that's TOTAL population... NOT just the genetic OR religious descendants of Abraham.

100 billion is 10^11... 100,000,000 times SMALLER than 10^19.

So we would seem to have quite a ways to go before the "End Times", **IF** one takes the Bible as literal... otherwise God will have reneged on his promise to Abraham.

CJSF
Matthew 24:36

Sorry honey, I know you're tired, but God told me in a dream last night that we need to have a lot more children to make up for his crazy promise to Abraham.

*ponder* Nah, I don't think she'll buy it.

Oh, about old M being banned... he was. It was about a week before this board went up, but I don't know if the BA tried enforcing the ban, since he kept posting his nonsense and never (or almost never) responding.

[img]/phpBB/images/smiles/icon_evil.gif[/img]

**Mr. X** · 2001-Oct-25, 08:27 PM

On 2001-10-25 15:09, Ben Benoy wrote:

On 2001-10-25 01:54, Peter B wrote:
Folks

Remember that Mifletz is quoting the Talmud, not the Bible. Presumably, in this context, he's quoting a commentary on the Book of Isaiah, although I accept I know nothing about the Talmud.

If he's quoting from the Mishnahs, from my understanding this is basically just the Hebrew bible. Then I should have found it. If he was quoting from the commentaries, then who cares? I don't think anybody says that the commentaries were also written by God. (Not Jewish, correct me if I'm wrong.)

Ben

Again, Ben's sharpness at work! [img]/phpBB/images/smiles/icon_smile.gif[/img] No way to go around him is there? [img]/phpBB/images/smiles/icon_razz.gif[/img]

So he was banned? He just shoots these things to disrupt I think.

[ This Message was edited by: Mr. X on 2001-10-25 16:28 ]

**The Curtmudgeon** · 2001-Oct-25, 08:42 PM

On 2001-10-25 14:03, Christopher Ferro wrote:
Something about this has been bugging me. I have been mulling it over all day, between processing satellite images...

****IF**** one was to take the Bible 100% literally, then there is a paradox related to some literalists' claims that the "End Times" are nigh upon us.

"Scripture" tells us that God PROMISED both sons of Abraham would have descendants numbering the same as the stars in the sky or sands on the seashore. In order to fulfill this promise, the total number of people decendend from Isaac OR Ishmael would have to equal those numbers...

CJSF
Matthew 24:36

Before you start worrying about whether people are taking Scripture to be 100% literal, it might help to get the Scriptural text right. Also, almost all Biblical literalists acknowledge that in places the text is clearly metaphorical; the problem comes about when text that is clearly not metaphorical is treated as if it were. When God says, "Your seed shall be like the sands of the sea", that's plainly a metaphor (okay, more pedantically, it's a simile); when the Bible says, "God created Man on the sixth day", that's clearly not metaphorical language. This is simple English 101 I'm talking here, not theology.

Here are the prophecies I find concerning the number of Abra[ha]m's descendants (all verses from Genesis):

013:016 And I will make thy seed as the dust of the earth: so that if a man can number the dust of the earth, then shall thy seed also be numbered.

This is said to Abram, before his name change to Abraham and before either son is born. It is metaphorical language, simply saying that his descendants shall be uncountable.

015:005 And he brought him forth abroad, and said, Look now toward heaven, and tell the stars, if thou be able to number them: and he said unto him, So shall thy seed be.

Again, spoken to Abram before the birth of his sons. Again, it is pointing out the innumerability of his seed, not saying that it is going to exactly equal the number of stars.

016:010 And the angel of the LORD said unto her, I will multiply thy seed exceedingly, that it shall not be numbered for multitude.

This was said to Hagar, the mother-to-be of Ishmael after he was conceived but before his birth. Again, innumerability.

022:017 That in blessing I will bless thee, and in multiplying I will multiply thy seed as the stars of the heaven, and as the sand which is upon the sea shore; and thy seed shall possess the gate of his enemies;

This was told to Abraham after the incident where he was instructed to offer Isaac up as a sacrifice.

028:014 And thy seed shall be as the dust of the earth, and thou shalt spread abroad to the west, and to the east, and to the north, and to the south: and in thee and in thy seed shall all the families of the earth be blessed.

This was said to Jacob (Isaac's son, later renamed Israel) on the occasion of the dream of the ladder between earth and heaven.

That's all the prophecies I can find in Genesis concerning the number of Abra[ha]m's descendants. All of them are phrased in metaphorical language--similes, using "like" and "as" to indicate comparisons, not statements of identity--and all clearly talking about the innability of man to ennumerate his descendants. When the poet says, "My love is like a red, red rose", nobody thinks that he's actually in love with a flower, and the same is true when reading the Bible in English translation.

The (literally myself) Curtmudgeon

**~~Mifletz~~** · 2001-Oct-25, 10:09 PM

The quote is from Talmud Berachot 32, written 2000 years ago. The Talmud is taken to be a discussion on the Oral Law given at the same time as the Written Law on Mt Sinai 3300 years ago. The question is: how did they know the order of magnitude of stars, which has only recently been confirmed?! There must be an element Divine inspiration.

**James** · 2001-Oct-25, 11:08 PM

On 2001-10-25 18:09, Mifletz wrote:
The quote is from Talmud Berachot 32, written 2000 years ago. The Talmud is taken to be a discussion on the Oral Law given at the same time as the Written Law on Mt Sinai 3300 years ago. The question is: how did they know the order of magnitude of stars, which has only recently been confirmed?! There must be an element Divine inspiration.

Or maybe the whole thing was just one big ol' fairy tale.

**Ben Benoy** · 2001-Oct-25, 11:21 PM

On 2001-10-25 18:09, Mifletz wrote:
The quote is from Talmud Berachot 32, written 2000 years ago. The Talmud is taken to be a discussion on the Oral Law given at the same time as the Written Law on Mt Sinai 3300 years ago. The question is: how did they know the order of magnitude of stars, which has only recently been confirmed?! There must be an element Divine inspiration.

Great, so now we're quoting from commentaries. By the way, does anybody know of a site, not in Hebrew, where these commentaries can be read? Haven't been able to find one.

Getting back to the topic at hand, as the Curtmudgeon said, it is metaphorical language. This technique is very common, and shows up in many ancient texts. I think that the reference above to Abram/Abraham's seed is sufficient proof that this sort of thing went on. What more, exactly, do you want?

They didn't actually "know" anything. The text is saying that there are a lot of stars in the sky, so many that they can't be counted. And if you do multiply out the supplied numbers, you get 1018, not 1019. So what is your point exactly?

It seems to be either dulled or non-existent.

Ben Benoy

**Mr. X** · 2001-Oct-25, 11:44 PM

On 2001-10-25 19:21, Ben Benoy wrote:

On 2001-10-25 18:09, Mifletz wrote:
The quote is from Talmud Berachot 32, written 2000 years ago. The Talmud is taken to be a discussion on the Oral Law given at the same time as the Written Law on Mt Sinai 3300 years ago. The question is: how did they know the order of magnitude of stars, which has only recently been confirmed?! There must be an element Divine inspiration.

Great, so now we're quoting from commentaries. By the way, does anybody know of a site, not in Hebrew, where these commentaries can be read? Haven't been able to find one.

Getting back to the topic at hand, as the Curtmudgeon said, it is metaphorical language. This technique is very common, and shows up in many ancient texts. I think that the reference above to Abram/Abraham's seed is sufficient proof that this sort of thing went on. What more, exactly, do you want?

They didn't actually "know" anything. The text is saying that there are a lot of stars in the sky, so many that they can't be counted. And if you do multiply out the supplied numbers, you get 1018, not 1019. So what is your point exactly?

It seems to be either dulled or non-existent.

Ben Benoy

Who knows. How did they know? I don't know, maybe they just said anything. You know, "even a broken clock is right 730 times per year" (I LOVE that quote from the X-Files!).

You know, the other day I went to the casino, found a slot machine, inserted 4 quarters, hit the button, bam, machine pays off 120$. I could also go to the roulette, bet everything I have on ONE number, and MAYBE I'll hit something.

Shooting a pellet gun at a can with your eyes closed works too, you know. Take a lot of pellets, and maybe eventually you'll hit.

Now take your book, if they shot random numbers like that every half a page, they might get some stuff right at times.

Random occurences and repeatable, demonstratable experiments are two different things.

OH NO! I took part in a Mifletz discussion! What have I done, what am I doing, what will I do!

[ This Message was edited by: Mr. X on 2001-10-25 19:48 ]

**Azpod** · 2001-Oct-26, 12:53 AM

On 2001-10-25 19:44, Mr. X wrote:

OH NO! I took part in a Mifletz discussion! What have I done, what am I doing, what will I do!

[img]/phpBB/images/smiles/icon_eek.gif[/img] Just padding your post count, no doubt. [img]/phpBB/images/smiles/icon_rolleyes.gif[/img]

Seriously, Mifeletz's arguments hold just about as much water as the people who believe that every disaster/earthquake/noteworthy event was predicted by Nostradamus. It's very much the broken clock being right twice a day. I could make vague predictions about something happening after some common event (a city in flames after a full moon, for instance) and have a reasonable chance of it happening numerous times in the future.

Does that make me psychic? Hardly.

Likewise with what Mifletz is saying. The funny thing is his math is way off. As ToSeek pointed out, there are much more than 10^8 galaxies. In essesance he created an estimate of the number of stars in the universe that is somewhere in the ballpark of the number of stars in the Talmudic (? I haven't read it) verse. Chances are, the number of stars in the universe is several orders of magnatude higher.

_________________
Just my two neurons worth,
Azpod... Formerly known as James Justin

[ This Message was edited by: Azpod on 2001-10-25 21:01 ]

**Mr. X** · 2001-Oct-26, 01:03 AM

How dare you! My post count is nothing but the time I have had available in the last two days!

Who are you agreeing with? Me?

It's very much the broken clock being right twice a day.

So you say I'm right? Okay well insult me at will, just continue to consider me the unquestioned leader of the universe, and other universes, and other dimensions.[img]/phpBB/images/smiles/icon_biggrin.gif[/img]

[ This Message was edited by: Mr. X on 2001-10-26 07:59 ]

**hullaballo** · 2001-Oct-26, 11:39 AM

How did they know the stars were innumerable? Lets see go out on a very dark night (no light pollution), look up, start counting. My God it's full of stars.[img]/phpBB/images/smiles/icon_smile.gif[/img]

Thread: How did the Hebrews know?

Thread Tools

Display

Posting Permissions