From fork-admin@xent.com  Mon Aug 26 15:32:30 2002
Return-Path: <fork-admin@xent.com>
Delivered-To: yyyy@localhost.netnoteinc.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by phobos.labs.netnoteinc.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8C4B844170
	for <jm@localhost>; Mon, 26 Aug 2002 10:26:39 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from phobos [127.0.0.1]
	by localhost with IMAP (fetchmail-5.9.0)
	for jm@localhost (single-drop); Mon, 26 Aug 2002 15:26:39 +0100 (IST)
Received: from xent.com ([64.161.22.236]) by dogma.slashnull.org
    (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g7PHJaZ20140 for <jm@jmason.org>;
    Sun, 25 Aug 2002 18:19:37 +0100
Received: from lair.xent.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by xent.com (Postfix)
    with ESMTP id 6E1B329410F; Sun, 25 Aug 2002 10:17:09 -0700 (PDT)
Delivered-To: fork@spamassassin.taint.org
Received: from mail.evergo.net (unknown [206.191.151.2]) by xent.com
    (Postfix) with SMTP id A08F329410C for <fork@xent.com>; Sun,
    25 Aug 2002 10:16:19 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (qmail 25936 invoked from network); 25 Aug 2002 17:18:12 -0000
Received: from dsl.206.191.151.102.evergo.net (HELO JMHALL)
    (206.191.151.102) by mail.evergo.net with SMTP; 25 Aug 2002 17:18:12 -0000
Reply-To: <johnhall@evergo.net>
From: "John Hall" <johnhall@evergo.net>
To: "'James Tauber'" <jtauber@jtauber.com>, <fork@spamassassin.taint.org>
Subject: My source: RE: A biblical digression
Message-Id: <000e01c24c5b$64b78980$0200a8c0@JMHALL>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-Msmail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.2627
Importance: Normal
X-Mimeole: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000
In-Reply-To: <20020825165054.C0EE52FD33@server3.fastmail.fm>
Sender: fork-admin@xent.com
Errors-To: fork-admin@xent.com
X-Beenthere: fork@spamassassin.taint.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.11
Precedence: bulk
List-Help: <mailto:fork-request@xent.com?subject=help>
List-Post: <mailto:fork@spamassassin.taint.org>
List-Subscribe: <http://xent.com/mailman/listinfo/fork>, <mailto:fork-request@xent.com?subject=subscribe>
List-Id: Friends of Rohit Khare <fork.xent.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://xent.com/mailman/listinfo/fork>,
    <mailto:fork-request@xent.com?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://xent.com/pipermail/fork/>
Date: Sun, 25 Aug 2002 10:17:46 -0700

Remember I didn't say it was necessarily a good source, just that it
looked good.

The site was http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_10c7.htm

My memory of what they said was accurate.  I do not have the competence
to defend what they said.  James Tauber's response indicates a breadth
of knowledge I can't match.


> -----Original Message-----
> From: James Tauber [mailto:jtauber@jtauber.com]
> Sent: Sunday, August 25, 2002 9:51 AM
> To: johnhall@evergo.net; fork@spamassassin.taint.org
> Subject: Re: A biblical digression
> 
> On Sat, 24 Aug 2002 11:07:00 -0700, "John Hall" <johnhall@evergo.net>
> said:
> > Ran across a site which claimed to explain the original meaning of
the
> > Ten Commandments.  It seems some of those meanings have evolved a
bit,
> > too.
> 
> By "meanings have evolved" do you [or they] mean that the Hebrew words
> have changed meaning or that our understanding of the Hebrew words
have
> changed? Or do they posit a pre-Mosaic form of the laws that had
> evolved by time of the Pentateuch?
> 
> > In particular, there was a claim that the commandment on stealing
was
> > actually specifically about 'man stealing -- selling a free man into
> > slavery.
> 
> This seems bogus to me. A quick check of the text indicates the the
> Hebrew word in question is GANAV which elsewhere in the Pentateuch (eg
> Gen 44.8) is used to mean steal silver and gold amongst other things.
> 
> In July 1999, I made the following comment in response to a similar
> claim about the "real" meaning of one of the ten commandments:
> 
> """
> > The translations since cause problems at each successive remove
> 
> We have the original language versions, though, so this is not an
> issue.
> 
> > I'm sure most everyone is familiar with the argument that the
meaning of
> the commandment
> > is 'thou shalt not murder' rather than 'kill,'
> 
> This has nothing to do with successive translations. It is based on
our
> knowledge of the meaning of the Hebrew word "ratsach". Most modern
> translations I've seen translate it "murder" but elsewhere the word is
> used
> of an animal killing a human (something for which most English
speakers
> wouldn't use the word "murder").
> """
> - http://www.xent.com/FoRK-archive/july99/0163.html
> 
> 
> 
> James
> --
>   James Tauber
>   jtauber@jtauber.com

http://xent.com/mailman/listinfo/fork

