[b-hebrew] repost of full question
Dirk Frulla
fiveacorns at yahoo.com
Wed Apr 23 00:23:09 EDT 2008
K Randolph,
My appologies for upsetting you.
However, what was it that upset you? I just spent the last 45 minutes re-reading all of my posts to this mailing list and I am struggling to find where I became disrepectful. Does it bother you that I would question statements made by someone in authority? You are right, I am a computer programmer. So I should assume that computer programmers should stay clear of mailing lists like this - at least until we've been through 4+ years of Biblical Hebrew? Maybe it would be beneifical to have a filtering process for people who would like to post here. When someone signs up, maybe it would be good for a moderator to ask what that person does for a living. True, I wake up in the morning and program computers, but does that mean that I can't take an interest in the Bible and the messages written in its pages and ask questions on inconsistencies that I see? It doesn't bother me to disagree with someone in authority. I have several Jr. programmers working with me,
and I would be a liar if I said they never questioned my opinion on matters - and I would be a fool if I never listened to their concerns. None of us are so "big" that we can't be questioned. Dr. Furuli has done a lot of work. It is possible to still respect his work and yet question it at the same time. In fact, after his last message, I was going to email him offline from the mailing list asking how to obtain a copy of his book. I *am* interested in these 90 anomolies - and the nature of the anomolies.
You seem to think that I am "lecturing" you (or others). Why? Because I am questioning certain statements? I never said "You are wrong!" or "It's got to be this way!". I have said, "I would really like consistency" and "I disagree". If you think that is "lecturing" or in some way being disrespectful, then I'm sure this entire mailing list is full of lecturing, disrectful people.
If you go back to my original post, I came to this list with a question regarding Biblical Hebrew based off of the research I have done somewhere else. I do have an "agenda" - and that is to learn more and come to a viewpoint that is consistent with all the information. YOU don't have to come to my viewpoint - the so-called "agenda" involves me, not you. My original post had 3 questions, all of which were regarding Hebrew. I wasn't too concerned about the first two, but Dr. Furuli did actually touch on them in his last post. Actually, I've had some research materials and references provided to me off-line from the mailing list. These materials have been helpful and I appreciate them. They touch on the first two of my questions as well.
As far as the third question, it was regarding Daniel 9:2 and the specific word rendered "fulfill". Nobody really touched on that word, except you in your last email when you wrote: "Now you, a computer programmer, on the basis of Strong's numbers and the definitions he wrote (he did not have a reputation as a linguist) are lecturing us?" - OK, why didn't you say that it was an unreliable source in the first place? Did you realize that would have been an answer? Do you have another source that IS more reliable? Is the definition of that word incorrect for some reason? Incomplete for some reason?
The point is, nobody said anything toward the actual question I asked. So what is wrong with me re-stating my question with different words? I agreed with Dr. Harold Holmyard and explicitly said I did not have an issue with *him*, and then re-stated my question and said unambigiously what my issue was. So I'm not sure how I could have been "lecuring" him. Dr. Furuli jumped into the conversation because he detected I was looking for agreement among different sources. Unfortunately, he quoted me 2 Chronicles 36:21 which uses the same word as in Daniel - so it just made my question stand out in my mind even further. Finally, Dr. Furuli stated that he has expressed his opionion about these scriptures as a linguist. Did I come lecture him about that?
As far as Persian history - agreed. I could use more knowledge about Persian history. I have it on my list of things to do. However, I repectfully disagree that my knowledge of Persian history (or lack thereof) should be any reason for me to not continue to ask questions regarding this issue. And if I see logical inconsistencies, then I shouldn't be afraid to speak up, even if I am wrong. Also, it is not improper for me to expect explanations for the answer I get.
You wrote:
"Secondly, you are insisting on a sequence of events that the prophecies do not."
My sequence of events came from Jeremiah 25:12, and Jeremiah 29:10. Please, how did I misrepreset the sequence of events described there?
You wrote:
"Third, while you may be correct about the Babylonian records (did they mention the acting king Belshazzar?), how good are those concerning the Medo-Persian period? From what I read, very poor."
I'm not sure what you mean here. You mean the adminstrative/business documents?
You wrote:
"Finally, if there is a difference between Biblical dating, and secular
historical consensus, I trust the Biblical dating far more than historical
consensus, therefore question the historical consensus. That's my personal
practice, others disagree."
Fair enough. I think I understand you. I have no problems with you saying that you hold the Bible in higher regard than the historical consensus. From your Biblical perpective, then, what is your date for the fall of Jerusalem? Or do you think that it is an un-answerable question?
Yours truely, with an agenda, :)
Dirk Frulla
----- Original Message ----
From: K Randolph <kwrandolph at gmail.com>
To: b-hebrew <b-hebrew at lists.ibiblio.org>
Sent: Tuesday, April 22, 2008 3:54:48 PM
Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] repost of full question
Dear Dirk:
Dr. Rolf Furuli is a professor teaching Hebrew and Semitic languages at a
university. Dr. Harold Holmyard really knows original languages,
translations and many cross references in the Bible. As for me, my only
claim to fame is that I have read the Old Testament many times through in
Hebrew, and wrote a dictionary for my personal use to help me in
understanding the text. Now you, a computer programmer, on the basis of
Strong's numbers and the definitions he wrote (he did not have a reputation
as a linguist) are lecturing us?
First of all, you are missing a king, Darius the Mede. The Bible does not
say how long he reigned, just that he was 62 years old when he took over the
kingdom (Daniel 6:1 (5:31 in English)). According to prophecy the Medes were
to be in ascendency first, to be followed by the Persians. But according to
Isaiah 44:24–45:4, Cyrus, not Darius, was to restore the temple and have
people return. Therefore Darius the Mede, who continued the Babylonian
Captivity, who was nominally the king of Babylon by means of conquest, was
not to be connected with the end of the exile, nor the completion of the 70
years desolation.
Secondly, you are insisting on a sequence of events that the prophecies do
not.
Third, while you may be correct about the Babylonian records (did they
mention the acting king Belshazzar?), how good are those concerning the
Medo-Persian period? From what I read, very poor.
Finally, if there is a difference between Biblical dating, and secular
historical consensus, I trust the Biblical dating far more than historical
consensus, therefore question the historical consensus. That's my personal
practice, others disagree.
This is my 2¢, and I do not intend to argue the point. You sound like a
person with an agenda, out to prove your theory. It that's the case, count
me out.
Yours, Karl W. Randolph.
_______________________________________________
b-hebrew mailing list
b-hebrew at lists.ibiblio.org
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew
____________________________________________________________________________________
Be a better friend, newshound, and
know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now. http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ
More information about the b-hebrew
mailing list