From: Jay Willingham (email@example.com)
Date: Tue Oct 15 2002 - 01:38:54 EDT
> Yes, it does mean I disagree with that explanation.
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Dick Fischer" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> To: <email@example.com>
> Sent: Monday, October 14, 2002 5:56 PM
> Subject: Re: What is your faith based on?
> > Jay Willingham wrote:
> > >Ian and I disagree, Dick.
> > Does this mean you also disagree with Gesenius? He explained
> > transmission errors in Scripture as follows:
> > "The causes of unintentional corruption in the great majority of
> > cases are--Interchange of similar letters, which has sometimes taken
> > place in the early `Phoenician' writing; transposition or omissions
> > of single letters, words, or even whole sentences, which are then
> > often added in the margin and thence brought back into the text in
> > the wrong place; such omission is generally due to homoioteleuton,
> > i.e. erroneous repetition of letters, words, and even sentences; its
> > opposite, haplography; and lastly wrong division of words, since at a
> > certain period in the transmission of the text the words were not
> > separated. --Intentional changes are due to corrections for the sake
> > of decency or of dogma, and to the insertion of glosses, some of them
> > very early."
> > Think being a translator is easy? Try this sentence in English.
> > lsplskpnmndthrgnlhbrwtxtwswrttnwithtvwlsrpncttn
> > Struggling? Okay, try this version:
> > Also, please keep in mind, the original Hebrew text was written
> > without vowels or punctuation.
> > I know, it would be nice to think that the original "God-breathed"
> > Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek Scriptures were perfectly preserved today
> > in English. That, indeed, would be nice.
> > Dick Fischer - The Origins Solution - www.orisol.com
> > ĪThe Answer we should have known about 150 years agoĶ
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Tue Oct 15 2002 - 02:18:08 EDT