Biblical Hebrew Forum

[Ian Hutchesson <mc2499 AT mclink.it>]

At 21.08 30/08/00 -0400, Stephen C. Carlson wrote:
>At 05:14 PM 8/30/00 +0200, Ian Hutchesson wrote:
>>I
>>in no way claim that the Hebrews worked on a notion of 24 hours: it is for
>>modern readers' convenience.
>
>I'm all in favor of convenience -- unless that convenience is an excuse
>to engage in sloppy thinking.  

I'll overlook the aspersion.

>If you are unwilling to claim that the
>Hebrews worked on a notion of 24 hours, why smuggle that meaning into
>the text under the guise of "convenience"?

Clarity is the importance of mentioning 24 hours. This simple qualification
is designed to exclude the ambiguities of the term "day" in English.

>>Could you supply some other way for us "moderns" to understand the period
>>of time which the writer indicates passes between one morning and the next
>>(the standard supplied in Gen1)?
>
>It is a "day."

This in itself does not deal with the problems that started the discussion
so it is of no help.

If your term "day" equates to that rough indication of the time between one
morning and the next given the present rotation rate of the earth, then I
can assume that your particular use of the term "day" at least here, though
imprecise, will suffice to show that you are not propagating that some
others are on this list.

A titzenclitz definition is quite necessary here. I'm pretty sure that our
writer would not accept the notion of a transvestite or a transsexual
person in his definition of female. (Absolutely no offence is meant towards
transvestites or transsexuals.) Given our writer's insistence of terms that
refer to a normal garden-variety time period (morning, evening, night and
day), anything other than a definition which clearly points in the
direction *indicated* by the writer would allow for the sorts of "sound
theological answers" that have no place in the understanding of the text.

So, while I vaguely understand your problem with the use of 24 hours, if I
also understand your use of day, there is no substantial contention between
us.


Ian