Biblical Hebrew Forum

[Ian Hutchesson <mc2499 AT mclink.it>]

At 14.15 31/08/00 +0100, Peter Kirk wrote:
>For evidence, I suggest you consult any good Hebrew grammar. 

This is Peter saying: I haven't got anything to back me up in my assumption
about what the text means and how it would have been perceived.

>They may not be
>infalliible, but I really don't think I should expect this type of abuse

As I perceive it, Peter, there was no abuse. I stated what I considered
fact: there didn't seem to be a skerrick of evidence provided by you for
your claim. And then I have complained about you misusing analogy a number
of times on this list, hence the comment about warm canines (and where one
might get one). I may of course have been wrong, but I don't consider there
to have been any abuse.

>merely for repeating what is well known by everyone who knows Hebrew well.

This is the phrase:

kl ymy xyyk

"all the days of your life" -- the length of your life measured out in days.

Your claim gets back to assuming things about the text and then excluding
the literal sense of the text.

>Or if you don't want to understand the Hebrew language, don't waste your
>time and ours, go and eat fast food yourself ;-)

This is merely retorting what was said to you in a different context so
that it is now without adequate reason, but that's ok.

I must point out that as per the usual process debating with you, Peter, we
tend to stray away from the subject matter onto the more trivial. This is
not my aim and I don't think I'm responsible for the move.

Ultimately, the subject is that mentioned in the subject line about the
ordinary day, which I called the 24 hour day. You were taking the position
for some reason that the day was  not necessarily the normal understanding
of the word. Is this still your contention, despite the numerous arguments
that I have put on the list lately? If so, why?


Ian