Biblical Hebrew Forum

[Peter Kirk <peterkirk AT qaya.org>]

On 02/08/2005 21:53, Vadim Cherny wrote:

> ...
>
> > You have asserted this many times, but you have not provided one scrap
> > of evidence.
> >
> >    
>
> a. No one would declare vowelization of a common verb secret
> b. Why use Aramaic root?
> c. Since all letters in yhwh are special cases, vowelization of the verb is
> uncertain and any standard reading has problems
> d. Greeks could not hear yhwh verb as Iao; in a parallel case of Jehu, the
> minimal transliteration is Iou, with o for he; Greeks heard he when it is
> the only consonant; alpha in Iao could only come from he, which is only
> possible if he is mater lectionis, and YHW is a construct, not a word
> e. The verb hypothesis doesn't straightforwardly explain YaH/ YaHu/ YaHo
> forms
> f. Plural suffixes are likewise construed of possessive suffixes
> g. Why use future tense or imperfect; "he shall exist" is not immediately
> meaningful
> h. Matres lectionis are a sufficiently important development to embed them
> in the divine name
> i. YHW as "I, thou, he" makes sense philosophically
> j. Since the verb ihie is common, a major prohibition of pronouncing the
> name in vain becomes meaningless
>
>  
Not one of these items of evidence bears any weight at all. This horse 
is dead because you have been feeding it only with hot air, no 
substance. So I will stop beating it by trying to answer you.

--
Peter Kirk
peter AT qaya.org (personal)
peterkirk AT qaya.org (work)
http://www.qaya.org/