Carter's Hero Goofs Again

Joseph Crea Joseph.Crea@worldnet.att.net
Sun, 31 Jan 1999 08:43:35 +0000 (00917793815, 19990131084335.CVFU27637@LOCALNAME) 

At 01:04 AM 1/31/99 -0500, Jason Carter wrote:

>A

>>CREA

>>    And to add insult to injury, it seem s poor Turkel/Holding isn't even

>>aware of the other translations which ape the NIV -- despite the fact that

>>these other versions have been cited by name/title here on ERRANCY.  I guess

>>that Carter, besides being unable to competently perform research, can't

>>even pass on pertinent information on a subject of some relevance to

>>Turkel/Holding.

>

>CARTER

>Crea, you've lost the argument. I respect your intellect and your academic

>knowledge, but please, vent somewhere else.  



CREA
    Sorry to disagree with you.  Take another look at Tim's citations:



>Tim

>The following quote is from Turkel's original "harmonization" of

>the Genesis accounts:

>

>"Poor King James, people are always pickin' on him. AS OUR MODERN

>TRANSLATIONS INDICATE, Gen. 2:19 should say, the Lord God had

>formed every beast, etc"

>

>Now, the new harmonization reads:

>

>"For quite some time now the classical solution to this problem

>has been to do what the NIV (BUT NO OTHER VERSION THAT I KNOW OF)

>has done, and that is to render the verb in verse 2:19 not as 

>simple past tense, but as a pluperfect, so:

>

>Now the LORD God had formed out of the ground all the beasts of 

>the field and all the birds of the air."



CREA
    Turkel/Holding's initial position was that "modern translations" (note
the use of the plural form here) used the past perfect (or pluperfect) in
rendering Genesis 2:19.  Now how could Turkel KNOW this, if he hadn't taken
the time to examine those "modern translations"?   But in his second attempt
at a harmonization he admits that while the NIV renders the passage in the
pluperfect, there is "NO OTHER VERSION THAT I [Turkel/Holding]  KNOW OF"
which supports this rendering.   So, at the very least, Turkel/Holding is
admitting that he really DIDN'T KNOW that "modern translations" supported
the pluperfect rendering in the first place -- in my book that makes him no
better than a common LIAR and a CHEAT, and basically renders suspect
anything else he may have to say.  And if you'd been reading the postings on
the subject, you'd have become aware of the existence of at least THREE
"modern translations" which opt for the pluperfect rendering -- most of
which have been done by "conservative"/"orthodox"/"fundamentalist"
translation teams committed to the concept of an inerrant bible. 


   And by the way, I'm STILL waiting for your demolition of my human eye vs.
cephalopod (octopus & squid) eye example of bungled design by your
purportedly omnipotent and omniscient DESIGNER.


With Anukampaa,

Joseph Crea
<Joseph.Crea@worldnet.att.net>