Ian Hutchesson mc2499 at
Fri Mar 15 07:23:52 EST 2002

>No, your method here is fundamentally flawed. It is a simple linguistic
>error to hold that a word or phrase can be understood apart from its
>context and that putting it into context is secondary.

You are misrepresenting the situation. Nobody is 
eliminating the context. The normal procedure in 
analysis is to look at the parts first, not bypass 

>I have always accepted your reading as a possible one, but consider that
>my one is preferable on the balance of probabilities. I was never
>arguing more than that, and hoping that you would recognise that my
>reading is also a possible one.

I don't think you have argued the probabilities. 
Perhaps it is my problem, but I don't think your 
reading can be justified. I have not seen you do 
so, other than by saying that an absolute is 
possible, which given the particular phrase needs 
to be demonstrated, given all the other time 
phrases I've already cited, I don't see you doing. 
This is one reason why I have attempted to get 
some response from you on the subject.


More information about the b-hebrew mailing list