[b-hebrew] (no subject)
Harold R. Holmyard III
hholmyard at ont.com
Mon Jul 5 19:48:15 EDT 2004
>On the question of Job 39:13, these are the
>steps I took to tease out a simple sentence that
>made sense and fit the context. Do you remember?
>I didnt need to do the final step with that
HH: I only remember vaguely. I don't think I was following that thread closely.
>Harold, are these the steps you take when you disagree with me?
HH: I've been studying the Bible for over thirty
years, reading translations, reading the
original, studying grammar, and reading
commentaries. I take whatever steps I need to
take to gain some certainty before I criticize
someone else's thinking. You can be sure of that.
> But if all you do is to present someone elses
>translation, how convincing is that? Especially
>when I may disagree with the translator on
>several points? Or do you have another
>methodology that you havent explained?
HH: I didn't just present somebody else's
translation. I made points with each verse. You
have not responded to those points. You did
notice that I made my own comments on each verse,
>With what aspects of this methodology do you disagree and why?
HH: I've already told you what I disagreed with
and why. It was the results you came up with on
the verb XBL and the translation ideas that you
produced for verses that used it.
>Is there any way to improve this methodology?
HH: Yes, compare your results with the findings
of other people. And give the results of others
the respect that they deserve. The NIV and NASB,
for example, are both major translations by
independent translation committees. So if they
agree, and agree with many other translations,
you have to have good reasons for disagreeing.
Correct your findings on XBL when you are shown
to be wrong.
>Oh yes, this methodology is combined with my
>presupposition borne out in practice that
>lexemes usually, though not always, have only
>one root definition and its definition will be
>recognizable in other lexemes from the same root.
HH: I don't know what makes you think you can
ditch the almost uniform conclusions of lexicons,
commentaries, and translations on XBL, as far as
I know. Your theory, in itself, does not give you
that right. Nor do your forced translations based
on it. You aren't even willing to defend your
results on most of the verses that we have
discussed. But this is where the rubber meets the
road. So when somebody shows you something, it
seems as though you shrug it off. Then you are
free to say that no one has proved you wrong.
More information about the b-hebrew