ELOHIM NOT PLURAL

Polycarp66 at aol.com Polycarp66 at aol.com
Tue Jan 29 15:19:08 EST 2002


In a message dated 1/29/2002 2:45:06 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
rosewalk at concentric.net writes:


> 
> Of all the "explanations" of the word Elohim that were cited on this list,
> Ibn Ezra's is the clearest and most correct, that I have seen.
> 
> He is no less an authority and expert on Biblical Hebrew than your sources.
> 

ibn Ezra was born c. 1089 A.D.  Not only is this considerably later than the 
time in which the TANAK was written, it is about 900 yrs ago.  Therefore he 
cannot be cited as an authority on contemporary usage.  Neither can he be 
cited as one who is aquainted with recent findings in the field.  I have 
little confidence in the linguistic pronouncements of scholars who lived only 
200 yrs ago.  There has been much progress in the field since that time.  If 
you wish to maintain that something is so because some long-dead and 
respected rabbi said so, I think you should do so in a different forum.  
Similarly, I have a great deal of respect for John Calvin.  If, however, 
someone were to say that something is to be understood in a particular way 
because Calvin did so, I would frankly be irritated.  I will not allow my 
thinking to be restricted to what someone once said years ago.

gfsomsel

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.ibiblio.org/pipermail/b-hebrew/attachments/20020129/7500cfe0/attachment.html 


More information about the b-hebrew mailing list