A Word from Mr. Lim: Forwarded from CCBE

• Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]

> >> D.Lim:

> >> It seems that Mr Till has backed out from the list challenge, not having

> >> reply with anything new or satisfactory for months.

> >> 

> >> I do not detect any new topic fixed yet for this challenge.

> >> Which part of the bible are we referring to this time?

> >> Lets see how Mr Till is not begging for question for errancy in the first

> >> place.

> >

> >Matthew Bell

> >So why don't you get on with it and give CCBE your 'in-depth' analysis of

'ken'

> >which will clearly show the two Hebrew sources presented to you to be

> >erroneous?

> >

> 

> TILL

> Matt, you have surely seen the traffic on this list.  I have this project in

> the works, but there have been more coming in on the list directed at me

> than I can cope with.  How do you expect me to deal with all the tangents

> that Carter leads us into and take care of this and other matters too?  You

> have no idea how many postings are in my in-box that I haven't been able to

> get to.


Matthew Bell
Please don't bother me with your problems.  You are the one
who has proposed that you can provide evidence that 'ken' does
not mean what we claimed all along and for which there now exists
two sources of support on the meaning of the word. I guess you will
just have to work your way around the problems.


> Matthew Bell

> By the way, if you will go back to what I posted on this subject earlier,

> you will see that I said my investigation of the word "ken" had uncovered at

> least one example where the word "ken" meant similar.  When I get back to

> this project, I will include that in my posting and show that the context in

> which the word was used is such that there can be no denial that it mean

> only similar and not EXACTLY the same.  Your problem is going to be that you

> can make no such claim for that kind of textual clarity in Exodus 7.


Matthew Bell
Nothing like moving the goalposts!! CCBE don't need to show that it can only
mean similar and not exactly in the passage, only that the meaning we have
taking is possible. You would be wasting your time and effort if you took that
line, indeed any line which does not counter the two Hebrew scholars who
support out understanding of the meaning of 'ken'.

Thanks
M.Bell

• Previous message: A Word from Mr. Lim: Forwarded from CCBE
• Next message: A Word from Mr. Lim: Forwarded from CCBE
• Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]