On Fri, 23 Jul 2004 00:22:34 -0500 "Karl Randolph" <kwrandolph AT email.com>
writes:
> Dave and Trevor:
>
> If KPH had the original meaning of to bend, why not mean bending
> towards, hence resulting in or causing, or even tending towards?
> Yes, I know that the idea of perverting justice is a bit of an
> eisegesis, but I see it implied by the hiding of the bribe. The
> hiding implies that there is something shady about it, something
> that neither party wants to be known outside of the giver and the
> givee. Where one finds hidden bribes, there one usually finds
> perversion of justice, and anger, even strong fury.
>
> The concept of hiding also implies a third party or parties who are
> part of the transaction, but who are not to be privy to the whole
> picture, in particular to the reason justice is twisted.
>
> If the gift were to be a sort of MNXH propitiatory gift as implied
> by bribe in Proverbs 6:35, theres no reason to hide it. Thats
> why I find the idea of bending away, hence deflection, of anger not
> making sense.
>
> This looks like a case similar to $KX שכח where if
> we were to take the Aramaic meaning of finding, we would not have
> the correct meaning in Biblical Hebrew.
>
> Karl W. Randolph.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
Karl,
That's precisely what's wrong with your approach. You attempt to make
the meaning of a word in any particular context fit the procrustean bed
of your preconceptions. As a consequence you end up with a wrong
understanding.