Biblical Hebrew Forum

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

----- Original Message -----
From: "Peter Kirk" <peter AT qaya.org>
> 
> On 19/11/2005 21:52, Karl Randolph wrote:
> 
> 
> Yes, this is a possible case of past `olam meaning rather less than 
> "ever since creation"  - if you assume that Jeremiah knew about the 
> flood, the Tower of Babel etc., which not everyone would.
> 
A literate, religious Jew of the priestly clan not knowing 
this?  ..... ..? At least seven centuries after it was written?

> > There are many other similar usages in Tanakh for the past, I 
> > don't need to repeat them.
> >
> > Similarly, (WLM referring to the future does not necessarily mean 
> > "forever" or "eternity", though it may, depending on context, 
> > unless you use "forever" and "eternity" in a highly idiosyncratic 
> > manner.
> >
> .... I am simply using 
> them to describe the understanding of the original Hebrew Bible 
> authors, which was not informed by the New Testament.
> 
Moses and the other authors of Tanakh knew that (WLM 
when referring to the past did not mean "forever" nor 
"eternity", rather it referred to a span of time whose limits 
were unknown (which could include "forever" or "eternity" 
as one possible understanding), there is no reason to 
assume that they had a different definition for the term 
when they referred to the future. It doesn't happen today. 
It makes no sense to claim it happened in the past.

You are making a claim concerning the thoughts of the 
original authors for which there is not only no evidence, 
but it goes against logic too.

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


The final paragraph above is why I should not have 
answered this letter, and why I should stop this 
interchange.

Karl W. Randolph.


-- 
___________________________________________________
Play 100s of games for FREE! http://games.mail.com/