bereshit (translations) Paul

Peter Kirk Peter_Kirk at
Wed Mar 20 09:28:03 EST 2002

It seems to me that Ian has a strong presupposition against his #4, such
that when his first alternative to it was proved baseless he retreated
to another, then another, then back to all three claiming to accept all
of them except for #3. But I don't understand his problem with #4.

Peter Kirk

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Paul Zellmer [mailto:smdirect at]
> Sent: 19 March 2002 20:00
> To: Biblical Hebrew
> Subject: RE: bereshit (translations) Paul
> Ian,
> I see a strong disconnect between this post and the response of
> "Let me invent a criterion: if I see convincing evidence that a time
> phrase
> such as br'$yt can stand at the beginning of a
> book without any qualification, then I might consider it possible in
> case of Gen 1:1, otherwise I will consider the notion simply
> speculation."
> It has been pointed out that we have clear indications from 2000+
> ago
> that this is exactly how people much closer to the language chose to
> translate this unit.  It is also true that this is the way that it has
> been
> seen by Hebrew scholars of the past, the same scholars and translators
> whom you give so much credence when it comes to complex structures
> supposedly governed by BY)M in Ezekiel.  You initially asked for
> you got some back, and you started defending your position like it was
> obviously the best choice, even though no other scholar has ever tried
> tie all that package together like you have.  It still sounds to me
> you
> are already convinced.  At the very least, you are not allowing
> to
> be open to being guided by some whom have studied this language and
> its
> forms more than have you.  So I have very good reason to "couch" my
> "comment
> like that."
> Paul Zellmer
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Ian Hutchesson [mailto:mc2499 at]
> > Sent: Tuesday, March 19, 2002 11:05 AM
> > To: Biblical Hebrew
> > Subject: Re: bereshit (translations) Paul
> >
> >
> > >Since you have convinced yourself,
> >
> > Paul, you've got no reason to couch your comment
> > like that. I have not convinced myself of
> > anything. I don't operate like that -- and I have
> > attempted to outline my procedures in the past.
> >
> ---
> You are currently subscribed to b-hebrew as: [Peter_Kirk at]
> To unsubscribe, forward this message to leave-b-hebrew-
> 14207U at
> To subscribe, send an email to join-b-hebrew at

More information about the b-hebrew mailing list