Biblical Hebrew Forum

["Karl Randolph" <kwrandolph AT email.com>]

Dear Harold:

I am not going to argue with you.

First of all, I come from an academic family. At least 
two of my great-grandparents had masters degrees, 
all four of my grandparents graduated from college 
programs, one was a professor, both my parents have 
PhDs and have taught at universities, and you expect 
me to be awed by "experts"? C'mon!

Basically, we differ on methodology, and until we can 
come to a consensus on that, we will never come to a 
consensus on the other issues that divide us. You 
believe the scholarly consensus is infallible; I see it, 
like any other human endeavor, often taking wrong 
turns. You claim that an interpretation that is old, it 
is right just because it is old; I counter that even 
traditions can be in error. While you base your 
studies on scholars and traditions, I base mine on 
methodology. One part of the methodology is that it is 
very rare for a lexeme to have two or more distinctly 
different definitions. Another part is to use an 
unpointed text. Another is where there are synonyms 
and antonyms recognized, that comparisons with these 
can help. And there are others.

Karl W. Randolph.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Harold R. Holmyard III" <hholmyard AT ont.com>

> 
> Dear Karl,
>
>...
>
> HH: But a persistent myth is different than the credible knowledge of
> the scholarly community. There is etymological data from other
> Semitic languages, and signs of the same root being used the same way
> in Hebrew. That is not a myth. Nor have you refuted the existing
> belief.
>
>...
>
>                               Yours,
>                               Harold Holmyard

-- 
___________________________________________________________
Sign-up for Ads Free at Mail.com
http://promo.mail.com/adsfreejump.htm