[b-hebrew] Genesis 1:2 - And the earth was without form, and void

Revdpickrel at wmconnect.com Revdpickrel at wmconnect.com
Sat Apr 15 18:31:20 EDT 2006

In a message dated 4/15/2006 3:30:33 PM Central Daylight Time, 
kwrandolph at email.com writes:

> I see you took this off list. OK.
> Why should I spend time learning about translations, derived works, when I 
> have the original? I read the Hebrew text almost daily and have read it from 
> cover to cover several times. I learned enough Hebrew to read the Old 
> Testament. It is from reading the Old Testament through several times that I became a 
> scholar of the language as well.

Excellent, Karl, that you are reading the text.  You have the original Hebrew 
text????  I have a POLYGLOT that pre-dates KJV by a couple hundred years and 
I thought that was good.  That's a good way to learn a language, I am doing 
the same with LXX  and so far I have completed through Genesis 27.  It has been 
slower that I would have hoped but I am compiling a LXX Lexicon and Greek 
English Interlinear as I go, these are hard to find.

> > I am studying from the Genesis (LXX) and the Hebrew to Greek translators
> > didn't use "lifeless and still".  I personally believe the understood 
> ancient
> > Hebrew and Greek better then modern translators understand it.  
> > By-the-way, is the
> > modern Hebrew the same Hebrew used in Alexandria, Babylon, and Ur, or 
> earlier?
> > 
> > Doug
> > Rev. Doug Pickrel, Litt.D.
> > Tejas Valley
> > San Antonio, Texas
> >
> No, modern Hebrew is a different language. Anyways, the inhabitants of Ur 
> spoke Sumarian, an Indo-European language. We do not know the location of Ur of 
> the Chaldeans where Abraham came from.

Yes, I have an archeological drawn map from the Univ. of Chicago that is also 
a pre-flood map.

> While I have not studied the LXX, those who have indicated to me that it is 
> an uneven translation: some of the translators were fairly good, others were 
> struggling. Further, by that time, Hebrew had not been spoken as a native 
> tongue for a few generations at least, if not a few centuries, and we have 
> better tools than did the ancients to study the language. By better tools, we have 
> lexica and concordances that the translators of the LXX did not have. And 
> now we can look up electronic texts to see connections that even a generation 
> ago was difficult to see.

Those seniors would marvel at our tools, but don't you think they were fluent 
in t' Hebrew and Alexandrian Greek?  I finish a verse and compare it to 
Hebrew text to verify my accuracy.  I found some problems in the longevity's and 
may be a sentence misplaced, but nothing major.  The LXX seems to paraphrase 
even with different grammer.

Rev. Doug Pickrel, Litt.D.
Tejas Valley
San Antonio, Texas

More information about the b-hebrew mailing list