Biblical Hebrew Forum

[Awohili AT aol.com]

I really think the point is settled, but not in Peter's favor, so he  
continues to jiggle with it.  Lexicographers from long ago have legitimized  
"time 
indefinite" or "indefinite time" or "unbounded time" or whatever.  To  argue 
otherwise is to fly in the face of the facts.  And to argue that  "time 
indefinite" is "bad English" begs the question, "Whose English?"
 
This protracted argument reminds me of what the Talmud says about why  God 
put these words in the Torah: "Let Us make man."  God, Who is  One, replied 
to 
the effect that it was to give the heretics something to  argue about.  The 
words do not change God's identity or essential  Being.  
 
But people like to argue, and God lets them.
 
Best wishes,
 
Solomon Landers
 
In a message dated 11/22/2005 5:52:08 A.M. Pacific Standard Time,  
kwrandolph AT email.com writes:

Peter:

That you make this claim after making strong assertions  
that views other than yours are wrong because that was 
not how the  ancients thought, makes the rest of your 
comments not worthy of detailed  response.

Karl W. Randolph.