Re: [asa] Number systems in the OT

Hi all,

Iain writes: " I'm not aware of any ancient civilization using base-7 arithmetic & indeed can't really see the motivation for using it."

Given that the number 7 does seem to hold some level of significance in the Genesis 1 story and also in later books of the Bible, that might suggest that they did hold the number to be sacred or special in some manner...just a thought...

Anyway, FYI, I'm leaving on vacation for the next two weeks, so I'll catch up with you all when I get back!

In Christ,
Christine (ASA member)

"For we walk by faith, not by sight" ~II Corinthians 5:7

Help save the life of a homeless animal--visit www.azrescue.org to find out how.

Recycling a single aluminum can conserves enough energy to power your TV for 3 hours--Reduce, Reuse, Recycle! Learn more at www.cleanup.org

--- On Fri, 8/22/08, Iain Strachan <igd.strachan@gmail.com> wrote:

> From: Iain Strachan <igd.strachan@gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [asa] Number systems in the OT
> To: philtill@aol.com
> Cc: asa@calvin.edu
> Date: Friday, August 22, 2008, 2:17 AM
> Hi, Phil,
>
> I'm not aware of any ancient civilization using base-7
> arithmetic & indeed
> can't really see the motivation for using it. The
> ancient Babylonians used
> base 60, certainly as early as 1900 BC and probably before.
> 60 was chosen
> because it has many divisors (and of course we see remnants
> of it in the 360
> degrees in a circle, 60 minutes in an hour 60 seconds in a
> minute.
>
> I think it was Michael Roberts that expressed the opinion
> that 7 was
> considered a sacred number because it is the first number
> that does NOT
> divide into 60; hence 1/7 could not be expressed in a
> finite expansion in
> Babylonian sexagesimal notation ( 1/60, 1/3600 etc).
>
> To use base-7 would seem counterintuitive, as it has no
> divisors.
>
> When you say 1,8 and 9 are used less frequently, what about
> 7? Numbers in
> base 7 would not contain the digit 7.
>
> There is a simple but initially puzzling law (Benford's
> law) that states
> that the numeral 1 occurs more frequently as the most
> significant digit than
> all the others in naturally occurring numbers. Apparently
> it can be used to
> detect fraudulent bank accounts where the numbers were
> generated by a random
> number generator.
>
> Read it up at
> http://math.suite101.com/article.cfm/benfords_law
>
> Iain
>
> On Fri, Aug 22, 2008 at 5:37 AM, <philtill@aol.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Does anybody on this list have expertise or any good
> resources on the
> > ancient number systems, in particular the Sumerian,
> Akkadian, Babylonian,
> > Egyptian, Canaanite, and/or Hittite systems from the
> time of Abraham (21st
> > century BCE) up to the time of the Exodus (15th
> through 13th centuries BCE)?
> >
> > The reason I ask is because I have been analyzing the
> numerals contained in
> > the two censuses in the book of Numbers and I'm
> convinced that these were
> > originally written in a base-7 system. Only 7
> different digits are used
> > with very few exceptions (omitting 1, 8, and 9 for the
> most part in the
> > numbering of each tribe) in both censuses. The odds
> of such low usage of
> > any three numerals occurring by chance** are about 1
> in a half million. If
> > you convert them to base-7 (with a particular twist in
> the conversion, to be
> > explained in the paper) then it becomes obvious how
> the numbers were
> > mistranslated and then edited a bit to make the sums
> work out for each
> > groupin of three tribes and for the overall nation in
> each census. I want
> > to write this up and submit to a journal. But I need
> more background on the
> > other number systems that existed at the time and
> before that time before I
> > can write a really good paper.
> >
> > The upshot of this base-7 analysis is that the
> Pentateuch must have been
> > composed at a sufficiently early date that base-10 had
> not become
> > universally accepted, yet, and at a sufficiently early
> date that the Jewish
> > scholars who edited the Pentateuch (during the
> Captivity) no longer
> > remembered that the numbers were originally base-7.
> That forgetfulness led
> > to the mistranslation of the numerals and editing to
> make the text
> > consistent. Fortunately for us, this provided
> numerical artefacts in the
> > text so that we can constrain the dating of its
> original composition. The
> > use of base-7 pushes the composition of the Pentateuch
> back to a very early
> > date, I believe. It's interesting to note that
> the census at the time of
> > David bears none of the artefacts of an underlying
> base-7 system, being
> > fully base-10.
> >
> > In particular, I want to know if the Mesopotamian
> civilization(s) used a
> > 6-day work week (or what kind of week?); if the
> Mesopotamians began adopting
> > base-10 from the Egyptians, Greeks, Persians or
> others, and by what date;
> > What the Egyptians used prior to their base-10
> heiratic system; what number
> > systems the other peoples in the Levant (such as the
> Hittites or Canaanites)
> > used; if anybody knows about the Hyksos's number
> system? And similar
> > questions.
> >
> > Thanks for any help you can provide.
> > Phil
> >
> > (** to be more precise: the odds were calculated for
> the occurrence of the
> > 6 non-zero numerals being in a contiguous block such
> as 2-7, as they are
> > found in the text. This is a little less likely than
> any 7 numerals being
> > used regardless of their contiguity. There is a
> particular reason why the
> > block would be contiguous and not include the numeral
> 1, as I'll explain in
> > the paper that I plan to write.)
> >
> >
> > ------------------------------
> > Get the MapQuest
> Toolbar<http://mapquest.com/toolbar?ncid=mpqmap00050000000010>.
> > Directions, Traffic, Gas Prices & More!
> >
>
>
>
> --
> -----------
> Non timeo sed caveo
>
> -----------

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Fri Aug 22 09:44:18 2008