|
|
|
leoofno
Skeptic Friend
USA
346 Posts |
 Posted - 11/22/2004 : 09:43:28
|
Hi. I lurk here from time to time, and this seemed right up your alley.
I just heard a preacher on the radio say that the Bible's numbering of the stars (as being similar to the number of sands of grain on a beach) is evidence of its devine authorship since in ancient times people thought there were only as many stars as could be seen with the naked eye. About 4000 or so. Only recently have we come to the realization that there are trillions of stars.
A quick web search seems to back this up: Aristotle apparently believed "what you see is what you get" (see www.csudh.edu/oliver/smt310-handouts/ptolemys/ptolemys.sphere.htm ), though I didn't find anything else that related to ancient expectations about the number of stars. The Talk.origins archive didn't have anything on this either.
I'm used to pro-Bible arguments being misleading, so this ones got me curious.
So, what are your thoughts on this. Is this actually a valid bit of (rare) evidence "for" the Bible, or is something important being left out? I'm betting on the latter.
|
"If you're not terrified, you're not paying attention." Eric Alterman
|
|
|
Valiant Dancer
Forum Goalie
USA
4826 Posts |
 Posted - 11/22/2004 : 10:16:36 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by leoofno
Hi. I lurk here from time to time, and this seemed right up your alley.
I just heard a preacher on the radio say that the Bible's numbering of the stars (as being similar to the number of sands of grain on a beach) is evidence of its devine authorship since in ancient times people thought there were only as many stars as could be seen with the naked eye. About 4000 or so. Only recently have we come to the realization that there are trillions of stars.
A quick web search seems to back this up: Aristotle apparently believed "what you see is what you get" (see www.csudh.edu/oliver/smt310-handouts/ptolemys/ptolemys.sphere.htm ), though I didn't find anything else that related to ancient expectations about the number of stars. The Talk.origins archive didn't have anything on this either.
I'm used to pro-Bible arguments being misleading, so this ones got me curious.
So, what are your thoughts on this. Is this actually a valid bit of (rare) evidence "for" the Bible, or is something important being left out? I'm betting on the latter.
Well, besides being completely wrong, it's a nice story.
Ancient peoples saw many more than we can currently due to the level of light polution being far less in ancient times. They noted the progression of constellations through the sky and posited an idea that there were many more unseen. As well as speculation about the milky way.
Also, the obvious point here is the passage is very misleading. The passage means to convey a number so large that it becomes meaningless to an ancient people. (sort of like AD&D dwarven counting to 10. 1.2.3.4.much.more.many.many.many.many) Ancient people had no concept of a number over tens of thousands. Millions and higher were completely foreign to them. Aristotle believed that what we saw is what we got. However, he saw a lot more than 4000 stars. |
Cthulhu/Asmodeus when you're tired of voting for the lesser of two evils
Brother Cutlass of Reasoned Discussion |
 |
|
|
BigPapaSmurf
SFN Die Hard
3192 Posts |
Posted - 11/22/2004 : 10:21:20 [Permalink]
|
Ill start,
For one you assume that all ancients thought like Aristotle, which is not the case.
When evidence that all ancients or even most of them thought this way, then we can further the discussion. Clearly there has never been a time when all people thought alike, or even close for that matter.
Second, this in no way is 'evidence' supporting the Bible. Your idea of evidence needs work. We really can only guess at the number of grains of sand in the world and stars in the universe, so no official comparison can be made. But say we can narrow it down, and say that there are 100 trillion sand grains and 50 trillion stars, that would make Jesus grossly inaccurate and would infact be evidence against the bible, seeing how divine knowledge would be very accurate. Its closer than 4000, but still not even close...
Short story, Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, of which this is not even remotely exceptional. |
"...things I have neither seen nor experienced nor heard tell of from anybody else; things, what is more, that do not in fact exist and could not ever exist at all. So my readers must not believe a word I say." -Lucian on his book True History
"...They accept such things on faith alone, without any evidence. So if a fraudulent and cunning person who knows how to take advantage of a situation comes among them, he can make himself rich in a short time." -Lucian critical of early Christians c.166 AD From his book, De Morte Peregrini |
|
|
|
Ricky
SFN Die Hard
USA
4907 Posts |
|
|
filthy
SFN Die Hard
USA
14408 Posts |
Posted - 11/22/2004 : 11:44:37 [Permalink]
|
Agree with Ricky.
I've always thought of this line as sort of a metaphore, as is much of the Bible. And it's a very good one, getting it's point across clearly and concisely. As well, it's pretty, damned poetic, as is much of the Bible.
Welcome leoofno! Stick around; lurking is fun, but joining the sometimes fractured fray is, well, I dunno, fun too, I guess. 
 |
"What luck for rulers that men do not think." -- Adolf Hitler (1889 - 1945)
"If only we could impeach on the basis of criminal stupidity, 90% of the Rethuglicans and half of the Democrats would be thrown out of office." ~~ P.Z. Myres
"The default position of human nature is to punch the other guy in the face and take his stuff." ~~ Dude
Brother Boot Knife of Warm Humanitarianism,
and Crypto-Communist! 
|
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26022 Posts |
Posted - 11/22/2004 : 13:33:11 [Permalink]
|
70 sextillion stars in the 'known' universe!:According to a study by Australian astronomers there are 70 sextillion (70,000,000,000,000,000,000,000) stars in the known universe.
It's also about 10 times as many stars as grains of sand on all the world's beaches and deserts. Which means, in turn, that a comparison of stars to grains of sand on A beach is even more inaccurate. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
BigPapaSmurf
SFN Die Hard
3192 Posts |
Posted - 11/22/2004 : 13:54:50 [Permalink]
|
Hey if its within 99% of the stated figure then its close enough for Creationists, so back off Dave!
|
"...things I have neither seen nor experienced nor heard tell of from anybody else; things, what is more, that do not in fact exist and could not ever exist at all. So my readers must not believe a word I say." -Lucian on his book True History
"...They accept such things on faith alone, without any evidence. So if a fraudulent and cunning person who knows how to take advantage of a situation comes among them, he can make himself rich in a short time." -Lucian critical of early Christians c.166 AD From his book, De Morte Peregrini |
|
|
|
leoofno
Skeptic Friend
USA
346 Posts |
Posted - 11/22/2004 : 14:39:42 [Permalink]
|
Thanks for the welcome, filthy. I was starting to feel unloved.
I live near New Orleans, so I don't see too many stars. 
Web searches indicate there are about 6000 stars bright enough to be seen under ideal conditions, so Aristotle could have only seen about 3000 or so. The radio spot implied that people could tell the difference between 4000 and "innumerable". That sounded reasonable. So it seemed significant that the Bible would call the stars innumerable if, indeed, they appeared numerable to the people at that time.
However, I now see that in context the Bible was refering to how numerous the descendants of Abraham would be:"as the stars of heaven and as the sand which is on the seashore." (Genesis 22:15-17 RSV). The author was not attempting to say anything about the number of stars. It just means that they assumed there were "many,many,many" stars. Thanks for pointing that out.
So to answer my own question, they left out the context. I hate it when that happens.
Next time I'll read the passage for myself.
|
"If you're not terrified, you're not paying attention." Eric Alterman
|
|
|
|
Siberia
SFN Addict
Brazil
2322 Posts |
Posted - 11/22/2004 : 14:49:41 [Permalink]
|
| Aaaaaand, welcome! |
"Why are you afraid of something you're not even sure exists?"
- The Kovenant, Via Negativa
"People who don't like their beliefs being laughed at shouldn't have such funny beliefs."
-- unknown
|
|
|
|
R.Wreck
SFN Regular
USA
1191 Posts |
Posted - 11/22/2004 : 14:53:53 [Permalink]
|
Welcome leoofno!
quote:
I just heard a preacher on the radio say that the Bible's numbering of the stars (as being similar to the number of sands of grain on a beach) is evidence of its devine authorship since in ancient times people thought there were only as many stars as could be seen with the naked eye. About 4000 or so. Only recently have we come to the realization that there are trillions of stars.
...
Is this actually a valid bit of (rare) evidence "for" the Bible, or is something important being left out? I'm betting on the latter.
As Valiant Dancer pointed out, the preacher was not exactly correct. I believe this could be an example of wishful thinking
quote:
Wishful thinking is interpreting facts, reports, events, perceptions, etc., according to what one would like to be the case rather than according to the actual evidence.
since the preacher obviously did not check his facts.
Selective thinking might also apply:
quote:
Selective thinking is the process whereby one selects out favorable evidence for remembrance and focus, while ignoring unfavorable evidence for a belief.
Did the preacher also address the bible passages which are clearly contradicted by scientific knowledge?
So I would say quite a bit is being left out, as you suspected.
|
The foundation of morality is to . . . give up pretending to believe that for which there is no evidence, and repeating unintelligible propositions about things beyond the possibliities of knowledge.
T. H. Huxley
The Cattle Prod of Enlightened Compassion
|
|
|
|
Dude
SFN Die Hard
USA
6891 Posts |
Posted - 11/22/2004 : 16:13:50 [Permalink]
|
I don't think any number that is in the thousands is accurate for the number of starts visible to the naked eye.
It depends on where you are, but near most big cities (or even small ones these days) the light we produce obscures the view of the night sky.
Now, out in the desert of NM, 100 miles away from the nearest small town, you can see thousands of visible stars in just one area of the sky.
And welcome leoofno, hope you brought your helmet! Gets a bit rough around here sometimes, but it's all good.
|
Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong.
-- Thomas Jefferson
"god :: the last refuge of a man with no answers and no argument." - G. Carlin
Hope, n.
The handmaiden of desperation; the opiate of despair; the illegible signpost on the road to perdition. ~~ da filth |
|
|
|
|
leoofno
Skeptic Friend
USA
346 Posts |
Posted - 11/23/2004 : 06:02:27 [Permalink]
|
This whole topic has got me curious as to just how many stars are actually vivible to the naked eye. 4000 or even 6000 seemed too small to me, but web searches indicated that it was in the ballpark.
http://www.alcyone.de/SIT/bsc/ indicates 9110 stars of brightness greater than magnitude 6.5 (consideded the min. for naked eye visibility).
http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/visible_from_earth_031229.html says "At most, 8,479 of them are visible from Earth to someone with perfect vision under ideal conditions. Not all these stars can be seen from any one location, of course. You miss about half of them by not travelling to the Southern Hemisphere, for example. The horizon, as well as the seasons, place further limits. Roughly 2,500 stars are available to the unaided eye in ideal conditions from a single spot at a given time."
I guess it just seems like more.
|
"If you're not terrified, you're not paying attention." Eric Alterman
|
|
|
|
Siberia
SFN Addict
Brazil
2322 Posts |
Posted - 11/23/2004 : 06:45:24 [Permalink]
|
| Maybe because space is really, really big... |
"Why are you afraid of something you're not even sure exists?"
- The Kovenant, Via Negativa
"People who don't like their beliefs being laughed at shouldn't have such funny beliefs."
-- unknown
|
|
|
|
Valiant Dancer
Forum Goalie
USA
4826 Posts |
Posted - 11/23/2004 : 07:04:55 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by leoofno
Thanks for the welcome, filthy. I was starting to feel unloved.
I live near New Orleans, so I don't see too many stars.
Web searches indicate there are about 6000 stars bright enough to be seen under ideal conditions, so Aristotle could have only seen about 3000 or so. The radio spot implied that people could tell the difference between 4000 and "innumerable". That sounded reasonable. So it seemed significant that the Bible would call the stars innumerable if, indeed, they appeared numerable to the people at that time.
However, I now see that in context the Bible was refering to how numerous the descendants of Abraham would be:"as the stars of heaven and as the sand which is on the seashore." (Genesis 22:15-17 RSV). The author was not attempting to say anything about the number of stars. It just means that they assumed there were "many,many,many" stars. Thanks for pointing that out.
So to answer my own question, they left out the context. I hate it when that happens.
Next time I'll read the passage for myself.
Usually when I hear someone on the radio make a Bible passage reference, I'll look it up myself because I have noticed that those individuals making wild claims and base it on the Bible have usually taken the passage out of context. The Levitican law which people claim condemn homosexuality as a sin is just one such set of passages. |
Cthulhu/Asmodeus when you're tired of voting for the lesser of two evils
Brother Cutlass of Reasoned Discussion |
|
|
|
Dr. Mabuse
Septic Fiend
Sweden
9688 Posts |
Posted - 11/23/2004 : 09:41:25 [Permalink]
|
During the middle ages in Sweden, identifying binary stars was a measure of eye-sight when accepting/conscripting people into the army.
I don't think it is unreasonable to suggest this scenario:
The writer of that particular verse in the bible recognised that different people will see different amount of stars, depending on how well their night vision is. Since some people can see more stars, then why shouldn't a cat with even better night vision see even more stars? So, if there are more stars than an ordinary man can see, there should be more stars than even a cat can see. Following this line of thinking, one can conclude that there must be more stars than one can ever hope to count. Innumerable. Like grains of sand on a beach. |
Dr. Mabuse - "When the going gets tough, the tough get Duct-tape..."
Dr. Mabuse whisper.mp3
"Equivocation is not just a job, for a creationist it's a way of life..." Dr. Mabuse
Support American Troops in Iraq:
Send them unarmed civilians for target practice..
Collateralmurder. |
|
|
|
beskeptigal
SFN Die Hard
USA
3834 Posts |
Posted - 11/25/2004 : 04:58:57 [Permalink]
|
I am amazed by the seemingly small number of visible stars. A clear night in the desert in Arizona, or Death Valley, or my relatives' Kansas farm when I was a kid says the number is way bigger. But the links are reliable. I guess a couple of thousand stars seems like more when you are ecstatically gazing at it comparing it to the handful of stars you can see from your city backyard.
As to the Bible guy, even if he were correct, which he wasn't, the Bible gets other bigger things wrong. There is no notice the Moon reflects the Sun's light. In fact, the Bible writers seemed to have even ignored the fact you can see the Moon during the day. |
| Edited by - beskeptigal on 11/25/2004 05:01:42 |
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Topic Locked
