Calculations about the New Jerusalem

[Marilyn C]

1 hour ago, Retrobyter said:

 

Hi Retro,

I`m moving on, and not just going round in circles.

Marilyn.

 

[Retrobyter]

On 4/14/2019 at 5:59 AM, Diaste said:

Then you are saying no conclusion can be drawn about the shape of the city and the pyramid argument fails. Fact is it's described as a cube just like any cube is described today. I solve for triangles quite frequently for my work, including constructing a pyramid shape from time to time, and never is the shape described x³. I have constructed hundreds of three dimensional shapes based on L, W, H and none have been described as a² x b² = c². But if you wish to persist contrary to everyday understanding you are certainly free to do so.

Shalom, Diaste.

No, I didn't say that at all. Conclusions about its shape CAN be drawn from the details. For instance, not only do we know that the dimensions are 12,000 furlongs x 12,000 furlongs x 12,000 furlongs, but we are also told that this city has FOUNDATIONS, the first at least of which would be sunk into the earth's crust for stability.

We are also told that there are three gates on each of its four sides that face in the compass directions, north, south, east, and west. That tells us that the city is aligned with north.

We are told that the river of the water of life, that is, a river of flowing water, flows from the Throne of God and of the Lamb throughout the city. Since water seeks its own level and flows downhill, Then we know that the Throne of God and of the Lamb is at the TOP of the city, and the water flows down throughout the city before it exits out onto the New Earth through those twelve gates, and we are told that those gates "always stand open."  How does that work in a CUBE??? The pyramid shape lends itself quite well to this fact.

There's more, but a nay-sayer will continue to resist the truth of God's Word. Don't be a nay-sayer.

 

Edited April 15, 2019 by Retrobyter
wrong word

[Retrobyter]

On 4/14/2019 at 6:53 AM, Diaste said:

Well, YOLO! 

It has been proven many times by amateur videographers that zooming in on a ship which cannot be seen by the naked eye brings the full ship back into view, right down to the waterline. There are many reasons why eyesight is obscured and to accept a popular argument, or arguments, as proof is intellectually lazy, imo. Perspective plays an enormous part in our ability to see distant objects. Objects shrink in the distance and every great Master artist has proven this for centuries. Given enough distance the object will disappear. 

There is a long straight road here in WY that drops down from a high point into a valley then climbs to another high point about 5 miles distant. I can see the entire roadway through the valley as it slowly shrinks to nothing more than a line then disappears altogether. Since I'm between two high points that disappearance of the roadway has nothing to do with the curve of a globe and everything to do with observation and perspective. One day I was parked on the high point above the valley taking in the scene across the valley to snow capped peaks when a car passed by heading into the valley. That vehicle shrunk to the size of an ant from my perspective before it got to the valley floor. Halfway through the valley I could no longer even detect movement nor see the glint of the chrome. Perspective, not a globular curve. Observation, not equation. Evidence, not agenda.

You realize that Eratosthenes calcs while correct, I reproduced these simple calculations, are based on two assumptions that cannot be proven. We have barely deviated from those factless assumptions for almost 600 years. 

I have asked several times of globe apologists for the video NASA must have of the spinning earth. After all, they were a total of 36 full days to the moon and back from late 60's to early 80's. They couldn't train a camera on the spinning globe to get the most amazing footage ever recorded? Imagine the awestruck wonder of actually being able to witness our globe spinning. But there's nothing, no real time video. 

One of the biggest and most profound arguments against the heliocentric model is the biblical proof, "and every eye will see him". That is not possible on a globe unless Jesus is coming in at least every cardinal direction at the same time. So, flat earth makes much more sense than the unproven spinning globe and whirling solar system careening through space at ludicrous speeds.

" for the pillars of the earth are the Lord's, and he hath set the world upon them." - 1 Samuel 2

"And the channels of the sea appeared, the foundations of the world were discovered," - 2 Samuel 22

" the world also shall be stable, that it be not moved." - 1 Chronicles 16

"Where wast thou when I laid the foundations of the earth? declare, if thou hast understanding." - Job 38

"the foundations of the world were discovered at thy rebuke, O Lord, " - Psalms 18

"Who laid the foundations of the earth, that it should not be removed for ever." - Psalms 104

And on and on. The earth is fixed by the word of the Lord. But you go ahead and believe whatever you wish; it's our privilege and curse.

Shalom, Diaste.

Okay, let's investigate this post:

First, "YOLO" ("You Only Live Once") doesn't apply to those who believe in the Resurrection! (Actually, in truth, it doesn't apply to ANYONE who trusts God for His imputed righteousness through justification, whether they know to believe in the Resurrection or not.)

Second, I'll get this out of the way. The reason why you only see pictures of the earth from space and not actual "movies" of the earth rotating to the sun is because it would make for a very BORING "movie!" See, despite the earth's fast speed of rotation, 24,902 miles / 24 hours = 1,037.5833333 mph, it STILL makes only 1 rotation in 24 hours! So, you would have to use the same time lapse photography for watching the earth rotate as you do for watching plants grow! That would speed up the process so you can watch the earth rotate. On the other hand, one flat-earth joker said that he still wouldn't believe it because it was a form of animation, stringing the pictures together to make a movie! Yes, it would, but "animation" doesn't make it FICTION any more than stringing together photos of a plant to watch it later as a movie makes the plant fiction!

 

[Diaste]

On 4/15/2019 at 4:32 AM, Retrobyter said:

Shalom, Diaste.

No, I didn't say that at all. Conclusions about its shape CAN be drawn from the details. For instance, not only do we know that the dimensions are 12,000 furlongs x 12,000 furlongs x 12,000 furlongs, but we are also told that this city has FOUNDATIONS, the first at least of which would be sunk into the earth's crust for stability.

We are also told that there are three gates on each of its four sides that face in the compass directions, north, south, east, and west. That tells us that the city is aligned with north.

We are told that the river of the water of life, that is, a river of flowing water, flows from the Throne of God and of the Lamb throughout the city. Since water seeks its own level and flows downhill, Then we know that the Throne of God and of the Lamb is at the TOP of the city, and the water flows down throughout the city before it exits out onto the New Earth through those twelve gates, and we are told that those gates "always stand open."  How does that work in a CUBE??? The pyramid shape lends itself quite well to this fact.

There's more, but a nay-sayer will continue to resist the truth of God's Word. Don't be a nay-sayer.

 

I am sorry, but none of that proves anything concerning a pyramid. A .5% grade is downhill, down hill does not mean the acme is a mountaintop.

A cube cannot be aligned in the cardinal directions? Of course it can. One can align either the vertical faces or the corners toward cardinal points.

A gate works much neater in a vertical wall, unless you're positing a gate angled at around 60°.

And gates in a cube cannot stand open? So a characteristic of a gate in a cube is they are locked? Inoperable? 

Maybe you're saying that water cannot flow out of the city through 12 gates if the city is a cube. So it's impossible the throne of God is raised to allow water to flow downhill? Water seeks it's own level so any miniscule change in height is found by a body of water.

In reality the city is described as X³ and not a² + b² = c².

 

[Diaste]

8 hours ago, Retrobyter said:

Shalom, Diaste.

Okay, let's investigate this post:

First, "YOLO" ("You Only Live Once") doesn't apply to those who believe in the Resurrection! (Actually, in truth, it doesn't apply to ANYONE who trusts God for His imputed righteousness through justification, whether they know to believe in the Resurrection or not.)

Second, I'll get this out of the way. The reason why you only see pictures of the earth from space and not actual "movies" of the earth rotating to the sun is because it would make for a very BORING "movie!" See, despite the earth's fast speed of rotation, 24,902 miles / 24 hours = 1,037.5833333 mph, it STILL makes only 1 rotation in 24 hours! So, you would have to use the same time lapse photography for watching the earth rotate as you do for watching plants grow! That would speed up the process so you can watch the earth rotate. On the other hand, one flat-earth joker said that he still wouldn't believe it because it was a form of animation, stringing the pictures together to make a movie! Yes, it would, but "animation" doesn't make it FICTION any more than stringing together photos of a plant to watch it later as a movie makes the plant fiction!

 

Boring or not the playback can be sped up to show the rotation, a fast forward. I would be fine with timelapse as long as it was a continuous series of shots that could be examined for shenanigans. But it doesn't exist, only stills and there are a great many questions about those.

And it would not be 'animation' in any sense. Time lapse takes photos at intervals and playback speed can be adjusted to speed up the movie. All the great minds at NASA and no one thought of this? Why?

All of this means little anyway. God says the earth sits immovable on foundations. End of story.

'YOLO' was in reference to the discussion of the helio v geo-centric models. As if to say, "Might as well give it a try." That's all, figure of speech.

 

[Retrobyter]

11 hours ago, Diaste said:

A cube cannot be aligned in the cardinal directions? Of course it can. One can align either the vertical faces or the corners toward cardinal points.

Shalom, Diaste.

No, what I'm saying is that, being aligned in the cardinal directions, forces the city to be placed UPON the New Earth. Remember: this city is still almost 1380 miles high. Also, being that wide as well, this city extends beyond a single time zone. If the center of the city is aligned to the center of the time zone, then its east and west walls are in two different time zones from the central time zone. Thus, we are talking about up to THREE time zones involved!

Now, according to your sun/spotlight theory, how high would this sun be? Could it even give the illusion of time zones around the city? Would it "TRIP" over the walls or "BUMP" into the roof?! And another question: how do you explain the rotation of the sun, watched by the spinning of sunspots and solar flares?

11 hours ago, Diaste said:

A gate works much neater in a vertical wall, unless you're positing a gate angled at around 60°.

And gates in a cube cannot stand open? So a characteristic of a gate in a cube is they are locked? Inoperable? 

The angle of the wall doesn't matter to THESE gates!

Revelation 21:12-13, 21-26 (KJV)

12 And had a wall great and high, and had twelve gates, and at the gates twelve angels, and names written thereon, which are the names of the twelve tribes of the children of Israel: 13 On the east three gates; on the north three gates; on the south three gates; and on the west three gates.
...

 21 And the twelve gates were twelve pearls; every several gate was of one pearl: and the street of the city was pure gold, as it were transparent glass.

22 And I saw no temple therein: for the Lord God Almighty and the Lamb are the temple of it. 23 And the city had no need of the sun, neither of the moon, to shine in it: for the glory of God did lighten it, and the Lamb is the light thereof. 24 And the nations of them which are saved shall walk in the light of it: and the kings of the earth do bring their glory and honour into it. 25 And the gates of it shall not be shut at all by day: for there shall be no night there. 26 And they shall bring the glory and honour of the nations into it.

So, these 12 gates are 12 pearls. Each separate gate was from one pearl. So, each one of these pearls is huge. Furthermore, why have gates that are never shut again? Furthermore, each gate is attended by an angel - a messenger. Also, each gate has one of the names of the 12 tribes of the children of Israel written upon it, literally, inscribed upon it.

The answer is simple: PEARLS ARE ROUND! ROUND OBJECTS ROLL! THESE gates are orbs permanently rolled away from the gateway entrances! Sound familiar? It should! Each one of these gates commemorate the Resurrection of our Lord! They don't have hinges!

Y'see, I never said that all of the conclusions I make are about the shape of the city. Some are just conclusions that result from the data provided for us. SOME of them, however, make better sense in a pyramid.

11 hours ago, Diaste said:

I am sorry, but none of that proves anything concerning a pyramid. A .5% grade is downhill, down hill does not mean the acme is a mountaintop.
...

Maybe you're saying that water cannot flow out of the city through 12 gates if the city is a cube. So it's impossible the throne of God is raised to allow water to flow downhill? Water seeks it's own level so any miniscule change in height is found by a body of water.

In reality the city is described as X³ and not a² + b² = c².

I would suggest you try a different equation for what you think represents a pyramid. The Pythagorean Theorem is for the 2-dimensional right triangle only. For most triangles, I use the Law of Cosines, which is somewhat related to the Pythagoreans Theorem, except that it is applicable for ALL triangles, acute, right, or obtuse: a² + b² -2ab cos (gamma) = c². However, this formula, too, is for 2-dimensional triangles (and "gamma" is the measure of the angle opposite leg c).

Since you are using X³, as in V = X³, which assumes that the length, the width, and the height are all labeled "X" instead of "x, y, and z," since x = y = z, then we are talking about the VOLUME of a cube, which IS 3-dimensional.

So, we should also be talking about the VOLUME of a regular, right, square pyramid. And, using your own trick of x = y = z, we can reduce this formula to V = 1/3 x X³.

Let's say that God's throne is in the center of the top of the city (although most position it in the very center of the cube): How does the water get from the throne to the corners of the top of the city, since this IS, after all, a 3-dimensional city? We can calculate this distance as the square root of (2 times the square of (1379.868686 miles / 2)). This would be a distance of 975 miles, 3772 feet. So, how does the water get there? by a series of PUMPS?!

If, however, the shape is that of a pyramid with God's throne in the pinnacle of the pyramid, all points within the pyramid are BELOW the throne of God, and water would naturally flow downhill to all parts of the city! Understand? This would be true, whether one believes in a round earth or a flat earth!

[BeauJangles]

12 minutes ago, Retrobyter said:

So, these 12 gates are 12 pearls. Each separate gate was from one pearl. So, each one of these pearls is huge.

I'm just trying to imagine the size these oysters are going to have to be. 

[Retrobyter]

5 hours ago, BeauJangles said:

I'm just trying to imagine the size these oysters are going to have to be. 

Shalom, BeauJangles.

LOL! Couldn't tell ya. First, we don't know whether God will even USE oysters to make these pearls! The text says nothing of their formation. He could, of course, create them ex nihilo!

Then, too, knowing how oysters put down layer after layer of material around an irritation within their shell to make a pearl, maybe they WILL be made by specially created oysters to represent symbolically how our sins have irritated God down through the years!

Since they will each have one of the names of the tribes of Israel, perhaps, they symbolize the irritations that the children of Israel have been to God down through the years!

We'll just have to wait and see.

Edited April 17, 2019 by Retrobyter
for emphasis

[Diaste]

On 4/16/2019 at 9:59 PM, Retrobyter said:

How does the water get from the throne to the corners of the top of the city,

Where are you getting this?

[Retrobyter]

8 hours ago, Diaste said:

Where are you getting this?

Shalom v'chag sameach, Diaste.

I'm getting it from all those people who say that the New Jerusalem is a CUBE! If it's a three-dimensional city, how is the water getting to all the "nooks and crannies" where people will live within a cube?! This is PARTICULARLY curious for those who believe that the throne of God and of the Lamb is in the exact center of the cube, since the river of the water of life ORIGINATES from the throne! How does it flow UPHILL?!

Revelation 22:1 (KJV)

1 And he shewed me a pure river of water of life, clear as crystal, proceeding out of the throne of God and of the Lamb.

From the exact center of the cube 12,000 "furlongs" x 12,000 "furlongs" x 12,000 "furlongs," to an upper corner of the cube would be 6,000 x the square root of 3 "furlongs" or 1,195 miles! How does the river get to those areas that far away and upward the whole way?

These are the things that mathematicians and architects and city planners think about when confronted with these facts.

Edited April 21, 2019 by Retrobyter