Biblical Hebrew Forum

[kgraham0938 AT comcast.net]

@Solomon:

I thought about this and I don't think time indefinite is a good translation. 
 We were discussing whether or not it makes sense to an English speaker and 
here are my thoughts on basic English.

1. The prefix "in" means no or not.
2.  Once you put "in" in front of definite, it literally means "not definite."
3.  For example and indefinite pronoun would be anyone or someone.
4.  Indefinite article can refer to "a person, a car."  It is not specific.
5.  Likewise, when placed infront of time, it means no specific time which as 
I have stated earlier can refer to 10 minutes or 15 years or eternalty.
6.  WLM is always referring to a long time, long duration.  The possibility 
of it just referring to something "not specific" is not there.

--
Kelton Graham 
KGRAHAM0938 AT comcast.net

-------------- Original message -------------- 

> 
> Not so. If you Google "olam indefinite time," as I did, you will have a 
> much different result. None of the first references was to the NWT or 
> Jehovah's Witnesses, but to word studies done by others that equate "olam" 
> with 
> an 
> indefinite time. One of such references goes back to James Orr, M.A., D.D., 
> general editor of the "International Standard Bible Encyclopedia," 
> published 
> in 1915. 
> 
> Besides, I thought the objective academic issue was not who uses the term, 
> but whether the term is an accurate representation of the Hebrew "olam." 
> Once 
> we go off subjectively into other matters and play the "sect" card, the 
> discussion devolves to another plane. 
> 
> Solomon Landers 
> . 
> 
> In a message dated 11/15/2005 6:39:26 A.M. Pacific Standard Time, 
> peter AT qaya.org writes: 
> 
> Do you have any reason to change your mind? It seems to me that these 
> translators did indeed make up the expression, or perhaps they borrowed 
> it from earlier teaching of their sect. 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________ 
> b-hebrew mailing list 
> b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org 
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew 
>From peter AT qaya.org  Wed Nov 16 07:41:36 2005
Return-Path: <peter AT qaya.org>
X-Original-To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Delivered-To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Received: from mail.link77.net (kastanet.org [208.145.81.89])
        by lists.ibiblio.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 65FD04C008
        for <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>; Wed, 16 Nov 2005 07:41:36 -0500 
(EST)
X-ExternalMail: External
X-Scanned-By: RAE MPP/Clamd http://raeinternet.com/mpp
Received: from [213.162.124.237] (account peter_kirk AT kastanet.org HELO
        [10.0.0.1]) by mail.link77.net (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.3.8)
        with ESMTPSA id 93865710; Wed, 16 Nov 2005 07:41:35 -0500
Message-ID: <437B2906.3020705 AT qaya.org>
Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2005 12:41:42 +0000
From: Peter Kirk <peter AT qaya.org>
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.6 (Windows/20050716)
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Awohili AT aol.com
References: <230.16af661.30ac7a7d AT aol.com>
In-Reply-To: <230.16af661.30ac7a7d AT aol.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] Daniel 6:27 (time indefinite) II
X-BeenThere: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.6
Precedence: list
List-Id: Hebrew Bible List <b-hebrew.lists.ibiblio.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew>,
        <mailto:b-hebrew-request AT lists.ibiblio.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://lists.ibiblio.org/sympa/arc/b-hebrew>
List-Post: <mailto:b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>
List-Help: <mailto:sympa AT lists.ibiblio.org?subject=HELP>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew>,
        <mailto:b-hebrew-request AT lists.ibiblio.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2005 12:41:36 -0000

On 16/11/2005 12:05, Awohili AT aol.com wrote:

> 
>Not so.  If you Google "olam indefinite time,"  as I did, you  will have a 
>much different result. ...
>

My objection is to the specific phrase and word order "to time 
indefinite". I googled this phrase with the quotation marks, and I 
accurately stated the results, so please withdraw "Not so" if that 
relates to my Google results. "Indefinite time" in the opposite order is 
a different phrase with a potentially different meaning, so of course 
the results are different.

Or does your "Not so" relate to my "It seems to me that these 
translators did  indeed make up the expression, or perhaps they borrowed 
it from earlier  teaching of their sect"? If so, do you have any 
evidence that the particular phrase "to time indefinite" was ever used 
by others? I agree that we don't want to play the "sect" card, but I do 
insist that if you contradict what I say you provide some evidence.

>... None of the first references was to the  NWT or 
>Jehovah's Witnesses, but to word studies done by others that equate  "olam" 
>with an 
>indefinite time.  One of such references goes back  to James Orr, M.A., 
>D.D., 
>general editor of the  "International  Standard Bible Encyclopedia," 
>published 
>in 1915.
>  
>

Can you give me a more detailed reference for this, if possible a URL? 
The only ISBE articles I can find are 
http://www.bible.org/isbe.asp?id=3220 and 
http://www.bible.org/isbe.asp?id=3221, which are not by Orr, and do not 
equate `olam with an indefinite time, although the latter does say that 
"In the Old Testament, God's eternity is only negatively expressed, as 
implying merely indefinitely extended time (Gen 21:33; Dt 33:27), though 
Isa 40:28 takes more absolute form." But "indefinitely extended time" is 
not the same as "indefinite time"; the former means a time extended 
without limit, whereas the latter simply means an uncertain time.

> 
>Besides, I thought the objective academic issue was not who uses the term,  
>but whether the term is an accurate representation of the Hebrew "olam."   
>Once 
>we go off subjectively into other matters and play the "sect" card, the  
>discussion devolves to another plane.
> 
>  
>
One of the issues was whether this phrase was a regularly used and 
meaningful English phrase. Its apparently very restricted use, outside 
the specific context for which it is being promoted, strongly suggests 
that it is not. And if the phrase is not meaningful, it cannot be an 
accurate representation of a presumably meaningful Hebrew word.

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