Changes

I would simply say that the numbers in the Biblical passage ''are'' correct, to their given precision.  Hence there is no controversy.  Likewise, if an encyclopedia gives the radius and circumference of the Earth to the nearest thousand feet, the encyclopedia is not "wrong about Pi," and nobody would seriously say it was.  It seems that only in the case of the Bible are critics so impassioned as to buy such a dopey argument.

I would simply say that the numbers in the Biblical passage ''are'' correct, to their given precision.  Hence there is no controversy.  Likewise, if an encyclopedia gives the radius and circumference of the Earth to the nearest thousand feet, the encyclopedia is not "wrong about Pi," and nobody would seriously say it was.  It seems that only in the case of the Bible are critics so impassioned as to buy such a dopey argument.

      

      

Also, I think it is too weak to say it was "common at the time to round numbers."  It is common ''all the time'' to give measurements like this, and to do so without any conscious or explicit rounding.  The way these bullet points are worded, they give the impression that the values D=10 and C=30 need to be explained by some hypothetical act:  maybe someone rounded a measurement, maybe they measured different parts of the rim, etc.  But D=10 and C=30 does not need any of these explanations because, as I said, they are correct to their given precision, and there is no discrepancy that needs to be explained.  I'd just remove them, lest they contribute to the sense of false controversy.

Also, I think it is too weak to say it was "common at the time to round numbers."  It is common ''all the time'' to give measurements like this, and to do so without any conscious or explicit rounding.  The way these bullet points are worded, they give the impression that the values D=10 and C=30 need to be explained by some hypothetical act:  maybe someone rounded a measurement, maybe they measured different parts of the rim, etc.  But D=10 and C=30 does not need any of these explanations because, as I said, they are correct to their given precision, and there is no discrepancy that needs to be explained.  I'd just remove them, lest they contribute to the sense of false controversy.--[[User:NgSmith|NgSmith]]

== Question on the Bible reference ==

== Question on the Bible reference ==