[b-hebrew] Jim Stinehart's Theories

dwashbur at nyx.net dwashbur at nyx.net
Wed Oct 8 16:32:04 EDT 2008


I'm going to qualify my own statement and say, now that we've seen Jim's explanation, I 
agree with George that we would do well to get back to the topic of Hebrew.  I do wish to 
thank Jim for his careful explanation, and George for allowing it.

On 8 Oct 2008 at 13:54, K Randolph wrote:

> George:
> Here I, along with Dave Washburn, will defend Jim Stinehart: he answered a
> direct question which now allows us to understand where he is coming from
> and why he is making those statements that he makes. I disagree with him
> more strongly, but that is based on linguistic basis and how the literature
> fits in with its historic milieu.
> 
> Before this message, his theories just appeared to be crazy babbling. Now I
> have a better understanding why he says what he says, I disagree with him on
> many layers, but at least it makes sense.
> 
> Karl W. Randolph.
> 
> On Tue, Oct 7, 2008 at 2:13 PM, George Athas <George.Athas at moore.edu.au>wrote:
> 
> > Can we please get back to discussing Hebrew language and literature. And
> > can I remind everyone that b-hebrew is not a place to argue an agenda. We
> > want to discuss and weigh up evidence only, and apply reasonable logic (not
> > extreme logic) to our analysis.
> >
> >
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > GEORGE ATHAS
> > Co-Moderator, B-Hebrew
> > Moore Theological College (Sydney, AUS)
> >
> _______________________________________________
> b-hebrew mailing list
> b-hebrew at lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew
> 


Dave Washburn
"I'll hold the nail.  And when I nod my head, you hit it with the hammer."



More information about the b-hebrew mailing list