Biblical Hebrew Forum

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

----- Original Message -----
From: "Peter Kirk" <peter AT qaya.org>
> 
> On 20/11/2005 04:34, Karl Randolph wrote:
> 
> > Peter:
> >
> > You have just given me the words concerning your assertion, 
> > namely "without evidence your assertion is valueless."
> >
> > You have provided no evidence that I nor others can recognize for 
> > your assertion, other than some vague personal opinion as to how 
> > you think ancient people thought.
> >
> >
> >
> Karl, you misunderstood me. I made no assertion.

Peter:

How about the assertion "I am not "us[ing] "forever" and 
"eternity" in a highly idiosyncratic manner", I am simply 
using them to describe the understanding of the original 
Hebrew Bible authors,..." from Sat Nov 19 17:33:34. On 
what basis do you claim to know what that understanding 
was? Where is your evidence?

Or how about your message sent Sat Nov 19 19:49:02 
where you made the assertion "My claim is based on the 
evidence of how `olam is actually used in biblical Hebrew, 
when the texts are read without theological 
presuppositions." What is the basis of that assertion?

Consistently throughout this thread you have made 
assertions concerning as to how the ancients thought 
without evidence to back yourself up. What evidence do 
you have other than your personal opinion as to how 
these particular ancients, namely those who authored 
Tanakh, thought? You can't use the text of Tanakh, as 
we who disagree with you are using that same text.

We find (WLM used for indeterminate though finite times 
in the past well short of eternity, or even close to creation 
in uses where there is no evidence of idiomatic uses of 
hyperbole, therefore, absent clear evidence to the 
contrary, we see no reason to assume that it had a 
different meaning in the future. In short, for past uses we 
find that it is used for unknown time in the past which can 
include a few hundred years, back to creation or even 
eternity, therefore its future uses could include a lifetime, 
a few hundred years, to the end of time or past it into 
eternity, the same as its past uses. Your assertions to 
the contrary are so far without evidence, therefore, in 
your own word, are "valueless".

Karl W. Randolph.

> ....      Other people, 
> including later on yourself, made assertions that `olam could mean 
> "indefinite or unknown time". I asked for evidence for these 
> assertions. Some verses were offered, but none of them (unless read 
> through the framework of certain kinds of Christian theology) in 
> fact support the assertion, as I have shown. I have always said 
> that I am open to evidence, whereas others seem to insist on the 
> truth of their assertion without being interested in evidence.
> 
> -- Peter Kirk
> peter AT qaya.org (personal)
> peterkirk AT qaya.org (work)
> http://www.qaya.org/


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