Biblical Hebrew Forum

[K Randolph <kwrandolph AT gmail.com>]

Randall:

On Mon, Mar 14, 2011 at 3:46 AM, Randall Buth <randallbuth AT gmail.com> wrote:

> Karl, I support you in holding to your inerrancy claim. There is nothing
> in my proposals that should detract you from that. But we do read the
> content of the texts and the literary intentions differently. Probably a
> majority of members of ETS OT-profs accept inerrancy and date
> Qohelet late. Or maybe a minority. I don't know. Franz Delitsch,
> certainly not Friedrich, would probably have been in that camp from
> an earlier era.
>

I don’t see how that is logically possible.

When a text starts out with an authorship formula, and within the text
indicates the identity of that author, how does accepting what the text says
as accurate square with the claim that it was written by an anonymous author
centuries later? How is it logical to hold both views at the same time? Or
even rational?

>
> Here, my concern is your "facility" in BH. You've apparently run
> through the BH text twenty plus times, dissolving everything into roots
> and some morphological categories that you learned from 'first year
> Hebrew'.


???? Where do you get these strange ideas? Why do you keep repeating things
that you know are false? Haven’t you taken note that I read first for
meaning, which I have mentioned more than once?


>
> blessings
> Randall Buth
>
> For the sake of this list, is it too much to ask you to stick to discussing
Hebrew and to stop making untrue claims?

Karl W. Randolph.