Reputation
715
Top tag
Next privilege 750 Rep.
See votes, expandable usercard
Badges
3 15
Newest
 Yearling
Impact
~137k people reached

  • 0 posts edited
  • 0 helpful flags
  • 32 votes cast
May
10
comment How to interpret Proverbs 6:16-19, in view of “Numbered Parallelism”
You don't get it. I had to do the translation to push the point. The translation indicates that there are actually no 6 or 7 items. The passage does not even bother to provide exactly 6 or 7 items. The point is, seven signifies the continuum. If I had not translated, would you have seen the fact?
May
8
comment How to interpret Proverbs 6:16-19, in view of “Numbered Parallelism”
To say that the Hebrew of the books between Genesis and Malakhi are indefinite compared to the books after Malakhi is a rather offensive opinion. And illogical. You are saying that one could invent a religion (say, voodism), and write a "new testament", and say that the Hebrew of Jer 31:31 is indefinite. If that is the case, why even claim the heritage of Genesis-Malakhi? Might as well, claim the heritage of Dostoevsky's Karamazov as your "old testament", and massage the Russian language to ensure Karamazov is in alignment to your "new testament".
May
8
comment How to interpret Proverbs 6:16-19, in view of “Numbered Parallelism”
I don't care about the JPS. What you are implying is, the books after Malakhi are the solid foundation. The Hebrew of the books between Genesis and Malakhi are indefinite language, and therefore must be interpreted/modified according to the books located after Malakhi. Whereas, my position is, the language of the books between Genesis to Malakhi are definite, and the veracity of the books after Malakhi must be judged from the foundation of the books between Genesis and Malakhi.
May
7
comment How to interpret Proverbs 6:16-19, in view of “Numbered Parallelism”
Who makes the call that "the Hebrew usage is broader than the English usage"? Still, the "soul of the LORD".
May
7
comment How to interpret Proverbs 6:16-19, in view of “Numbered Parallelism”
Why can't your English translations translate as "soul of the LORD"? Is it because your religion says the LORD has no soul since He should have a spirit. The LORD having a soul and a spirit would break the trinity, and so your Bibles have to mistranslate to ensure the trinity is reflected "accurately"?
May
7
answered How to interpret Proverbs 6:16-19, in view of “Numbered Parallelism”
May
5
awarded  Popular Question
Apr
24
comment What is the meaning of mešeq in Genesis 15:2?
Is no less valid than other opinions which likewise depend on conjectures. At least my conjecture is based on the usual common Hebrew grammatical patterns and inflections.
Apr
23
comment What is the meaning of mešeq in Genesis 15:2?
"folk etymology"? Using the word "folk" is a cunning way to sweep aside a theological argument based on Hebrew word analysis. Certainly, some of the opinions you read and accept, too are "folk" analogy that got accepted, which you never bothered to question.
Apr
23
comment Was Moses the probable author of Genesis?
It's too bad you don't read Hebrew, and you can only say "well that was how the translators translated it". Your KJV, RSV, NIV depend heavily on the septuagint. The American Standard version does try to be close to the masoret, but when it comes to avoiding contradiction with christian doctrine, it too continues to depend on the septuagint. All of Christian doctrines are based on the septuagint, not the masoret, in conjunction with the newer greek christian documents/epistles.
Apr
22
comment Was Moses the probable author of Genesis?
Yet, are there original copies of the septuagint? The masoret had been and still is compulsively copied by hand over hundreds of years. The septuagint as result of translation to Greek, has lost most of the Hebrew dynamics.
Apr
22
comment Was Moses the probable author of Genesis?
Yes. In fact, almost of the entire Psalm 23 is mistranslated in English. The fact is, you are using the septuagint as basis of translation and the masoret as paper weight. The excuse is, septuagint was translated earlier than the earliest discovered manuscripts of masoret or dead sea scrolls.
Apr
22
comment What is the meaning of mešeq in Genesis 15:2?
The fact that Damascus existed as a city, demonstrated the must have been pervasiveness of the story of Abraham and Eliezer. That is to say, linguistic paleontological evidence for the existence of Abraham and the factual prominence of legacy of Abraham even among the Assyrians that a city was founded out of the birthplace of his adoptive kin.
Apr
22
answered What is the meaning of mešeq in Genesis 15:2?
Apr
22
comment Was Moses the probable author of Genesis?
[כתב]KThV = write. [כתוב] KThWV = passive participle, written. [כתובים] KThWVIM = plural = the (collection of) the written = the books. [כיתב] KiThaV = piel intensive perfected = writing with intensive effort = to write a book, for example is rather intensive writing. Therefore, do not use modern and medieval Hebrew to interpret ancient Hebrew. SFR is merely the accounting of details that may not have transpired the KThV phase.
Apr
22
comment Was Moses the probable author of Genesis?
Numbers 21:14 does not actually necessarily say "the book" of wars. [ספר] is rather in mutated meaning in modern and medieval Hebrew. If you analysed aramaic and arabic, the word for "book" is more towards using [כתב] KThV. Like AlKitab = the Book = the Bible. Whereas, [ספר] originally means "to count". And it is actually used as "to give an account of". As of today, Arabic retains the original meaning of SFR = count. Therefore, the verse actually says, "On the fact of saying in the verbal history of the wars of the LORD ... ". No "book" was involved.
Mar
15
revised Do 2nd Peter 3:12 and Amos 5:18 contradict each other in their advice in regard to the day of God?
added 852 characters in body
Mar
1
comment What is the meaning of the reference to 'stones' in Ecclesiastes 3?
People who vote this down need to read the original Hebrew not the English or Greek translations.
Feb
18
comment Do 2nd Peter 3:12 and Amos 5:18 contradict each other in their advice in regard to the day of God?
Scriptural machiavellianism = the strategy of maintaining more than one context and meaning for a concept, such that the meaning is conveniently switched at all costs to ensure the integrity of a doctrine, without consideration to the integrity of the concept itself.
Feb
18
comment Do 2nd Peter 3:12 and Amos 5:18 contradict each other in their advice in regard to the day of God?
So, 2Pet3:12 does not say any believer/devotee should expect and hasten the day? Only certain people are to expect and hasten the day? Are you saying that not everyone should expect and hasten the day?