Supposing therefore that the Jews learned the Cubit of Memphis in Ægypt, and that it was their vulgar Cubit, and consequently that in the time of Moses, and soon after, when, as Mr. Greaves contend, the Pyramids were built, the vulgar Cubit was of the same magnitude with that of Memphis; the sacred Cubit in those times was not less than 2557100, nor greater than 2579100 Unciæ of the Roman foot.
I hope you see the problem with this logic. Newton is deducing the length of the Sacred Cubit from an assumption that the cubit used to build the Great Pyramid (Memphis) was identical with the vulgar cubit of the Jews. That the two must have been of equal length is based on the assumption that the Great Pyramid was built during the time of Moses. A pretty House of Cards. I can see how John Taylor might have read this and concluded that the Great Pyramid was designed with a cubit based on, ie by conversion from, Solomon's Sacred Cubit and ultimately the cubit used to build the arc.
While we're at it....recognition bias
The cubit indicated is 693/400 feet and this is 1.7325 imperial feet 20.79 inches and is instantly recognisable.
You just fell into the very trap I warned you about in my earlier post.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 19-Jun-18 07:05 by Manu.