|
Didaktikon
|
1# |
Rank:Posterior Maximus I
Score:17390
Registered:
29/08/2007
|
Reply To brolga
(Date Posted:13/07/2008 23:02:16)
Hi, Ralph.
Pardon? Hebrew, as is the case with Greek, applies what is known as grammatical gender. Simply because a word appears as either 'masculine' or 'feminine' in its grammatical form in Hebrew, does not automatically infer a gendered concept. You are confusing an English language 'truism' for what is actually not the case in many (if not most) non-English languages.
So please, let's not see any more of this 'un-tethered' and nonsensical form of 'exegesis', okay?
Blessings,
Ian
--------------------------------------------------------------
Vivos voco, mortuos plango
website: www.pleaseconsider.info email: didaktikon@gmail.com
|
|
brolga
|
2# |
Rank:Poster Grande III
Score:14470
Registered:
01/03/2007
|
RE:Mother Earth
(Date Posted:14/07/2008 00:10:27)
Just one of my "dippy" fits. sorry.
I'm going off line for a time.
brolga.
(Message edited by brolga On 14/07/2008 06:35:16)
--------------------------------------------------------------
Who said it could not be done? And tell me what great victories does he have to his credit which qualifies him to judge others accurately?
|
|
Didaktikon
|
3# |
Rank:Posterior Maximus I
Score:17390
Registered:
29/08/2007
|
RE:Mother Earth
(Date Posted:14/07/2008 02:11:03)
Ralph,
An interesting comment. Very interesting.
Blessings,
Ian
(Message edited by Didaktikon On 14/07/2008 02:13:14)
--------------------------------------------------------------
Vivos voco, mortuos plango
website: www.pleaseconsider.info email: didaktikon@gmail.com
|
|
brolga
|
4# |
Rank:Poster Grande III
Score:14470
Registered:
01/03/2007
|
RE:Mother Earth
(Date Posted:16/07/2008 19:37:29)
Reply to Didaktikon
Hi, Ralph.
Pardon? Hebrew, as is the case with Greek, applies what is known as grammatical gender. Simply because a word appears as either 'masculine' or 'feminine' in its grammatical form in Hebrew, does not automatically infer a gendered concept. You are confusing an English language 'truism' for what is actually not the case in many (if not most) non-English languages.
So please, let's not see any more of this 'un-tethered' and nonsensical form of 'exegesis', okay?
Blessings,
Ian |
OK, Ian, Fww The object of my post above was not to 'exegesis' a subject but an unrelated question ( note '?') as to whether the term "mother earth" could have derived from that in human expression (ok I know it was dumb). The word 'she' came to light in the translation, allbeit I should not have inserted (feminine). I know it had nothing to do with biblical studies or theology, that wasn't my intention. However, may I ask, why is it referred to 'she' and not 'he' or 'it'? Can it be answered simply or does one have to have a degree in Hebrew to understand? brolga
(Message edited by brolga On 16/07/2008 19:53:10)
--------------------------------------------------------------
Who said it could not be done? And tell me what great victories does he have to his credit which qualifies him to judge others accurately?
|
|
Didaktikon
|
5# |
Rank:Posterior Maximus I
Score:17390
Registered:
29/08/2007
|
Reply To brolga
(Date Posted:16/07/2008 20:05:58)
Good morning, Ralph.
Feeling better now?
The object of my post above was not to 'exegesis' a subject but an unrelated question ( note '?') as to whether the term "mother earth" could have derived from that in human expression.
Right, but what you did was "exegesis" (actually, eisegesis) whether that is what you thought you were doing at the time of not. But the answer to the question is "no". The term "Mother Earth" derives from the 14th century, and had to do with the fact that "life sprouts from the earth", hence the maternal imagery.
The word 'she' came to light in the translation, allbeit I should not have inserted (feminine). I know it had nothing to do with biblical studies or theology, that wasn't my intention.
I think I'd given you advice previously about avoiding exegetical "decisions" based on what you think you see in an interlinear. People who can't work in the original should altogether avoid interlinears for precisely the reasons that you demonstrated, above. The fact that you attempted to derive an outcome, from what you thought was a point being made in a "biblical" text, infers biblical interpretation at work (a.k.a. "exegesis"). The point is this: what you did was precisely what Revivalist pastors do all the time!
However, may I ask, why is it referred to 'she' and not 'he' or 'it'? Can it be answered simply or does one have to have a degree in Hebrew to understand?
Hebrew uses grammatical (and not natural) gender. In this respect it's completely different to English, where grammatical gender generally equals natural gender. I've already mentioned this in my earlier response. But biblical Hebrew is different to English in another respect: Hebrew has only the two (grammatical) genders: masculine and feminine. It doesn't possess a neuter gender, hence one can't say "it" in biblical Hebrew. Some words appear as masculine, others as feminine, quite often for no apparent reason (just as is the case with modern German, for example).
Now it's best that you stick to English translations, Ralph, and avoid "dabbling" in Hebrew and Greek until you've learned enough of the languages to derive responsible results.
Blessings,
Ian
(Message edited by Didaktikon On 16/07/2008 20:11:09)
--------------------------------------------------------------
Vivos voco, mortuos plango
website: www.pleaseconsider.info email: didaktikon@gmail.com
|
| |
