Biblical Hebrew Forum

[peter_kirk AT sil.org]

Dear Tsadowq,

I sympathise with many of your points. All list members should indeed 
be respectful towards those who bring up any kind of suggestion, 
however absurd it may seem. As in science, so in study of the Biblical 
text ideas which seem absurd in one generation may suddenly be the 
orthodoxy in the next one. So please keep us from intellectual 
arrogance. Actually, linguistic insights very often cut across the 
authoritative "liberal" commentaries, in that for example they don't 
seem to lend much support to the "documentary hypothesis". On the 
other hand, some suggestions which have been made on this list do seem 
to be based on misunderstanding of the Hebrew language (as the 
proposers often recognise when this is pointed out), and it is surely 
right that others on the list gently instruct those who are in error.

I am glad that you have apparently concluded, after two years' work, 
that the "Bible Codes" could have been generated by lots of monkeys, 
i.e. presumably at random. But I don't understand in that case why you 
attack those who have concluded the same rather more quickly. A 
mechanic can actually tell a lot without opening the hood, from the 
sound of an engine etc. These guys have concluded from listening that 
this car is not worth buying. Good for you that you have opened the 
hood and investigated in more detail what is actually wrong with the 
car, and that you are also not buying.

Gematria is not the same thing as the "Bible Codes", it has an 
altogether better "sound" and this hood may be worth looking under - 
especially when applied to words and short phrases rather than long 
passages. So please share with us your insights on this. Do you have 
evidence for gematria being used in the composition of the Hebrew 
Bible, rather than just in its later interpretation?

Peter Kirk