tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11875966.post293683698724607743..comments2023-10-20T07:28:50.948-07:00Comments on Better Bibles Blog: Aner and GrudemWayne Lemanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18024771201561767893noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11875966.post-48296404039324183092007-06-18T14:36:00.000-07:002007-06-18T14:36:00.000-07:00Thank you, Ken. I'm sorry I missed this earlier. I...Thank you, Ken. I'm sorry I missed this earlier. I believe that the discussion regarding <I>aner</I> is of minimal doctrinal concern. It is simply one thing that Prof. Grudem has latched on to in order to bring disrepute on the TNIV. The translation of <I> aner</I> does not affect any teaching concering women - it is simply Dr. Grudem's wish to make this a cause of contention with the TNIV translators. <BR/><BR/>It is interesting to note that Dan Wallace does not have this difficulty with <I>aner</I> and in fact, Dr. Grudem commends the NET Bible notes. So I do have to wonder why Dr. Grudem makes this criticism of the TNIV at all.Suzanne McCarthyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07033350578895908993noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11875966.post-56543098992091926882007-05-15T19:49:00.000-07:002007-05-15T19:49:00.000-07:00I am not an experienced translator, but in examini...I am not an experienced translator, but in examining your argument that "aner" means "people", based on the classical Greek "usages" you provided from Liddell-Scott, your sole basis for making the argument that you are, in using the quotations that you did, seems to be that since more than one person was being referred to (the plural form of the word), "woman" have to be included in the usage. You seemingly say, "There is no question that this has to be generic." This is a circular and flawed argument. As unconfortable as it may be for you to believe, there is no reason to think that females would have been in view in the quotations that you used. We need to let the ancient documents say what they "say", not how we want them to be understood. As a Pastor, I sympathize with the need to make sure women (guna) as well as men (andres) feel connected with the message every Sunday, and I do my best to see to it that happens. That is alright for myself as a Pastor. That is not alright for Bible translators. Christians need to accept and be comfortable with the roles that God has assigned men and women in the sacred Scriptures, and leave the ancient manuscripts speak without trying to help God be more clear. God is as clear as He needs to be. Professor Grudem has made a valid and substantial argument against how you would seek to "translate" (and perhaps) distort the Bible. You would do well to defer to his wisdom and expertice (sic??). I do not want to be disrespectful here, but this is the kind of argument that is made in the hope that uneducated people can be influenced toward an untenable position (this seems to be what it says, so it has to be what it is saying). This is the kind of logic that Brian Williams, Charles Gibson or Katie Couric utilize every night to motivate people toward the ungodly positions that they do. It is the sort of thing however that is inappropriate for a Christian. What you have made those quotations from the lexicon say, you have not proved, and with that as the case, it needs to be said that your argument has no basis in fact.<BR/><BR/>Sincerely,<BR/>Ken ZitschKenneth E. Zitsch Jr.https://www.blogger.com/profile/02300267719098067465noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11875966.post-84155215087648983272007-05-09T12:33:00.000-07:002007-05-09T12:33:00.000-07:00Thanks Suzanne, as opposd to Grudem's reading I th...Thanks Suzanne, as opposd to Grudem's reading I think in most instances the gender specificity is something that we bring to the text. I agree with Nida and with you.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12014124722441378520noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11875966.post-63436954507449903572007-04-03T01:59:00.000-07:002007-04-03T01:59:00.000-07:00Indeed. Alice was Henry Liddell's daughter. Senten...Indeed. Alice was Henry Liddell's daughter. Sentences like "<I>When I use a word,... it means just what I choose it to mean - neither more nor less</I>" no doubt allude to Liddell's prescriptive style of lexicography. See also <A HREF="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humpty_Dumptyism" REL="nofollow">this Wikipedia article</A>; surely Grudem is something of a Humpty Dumptyist. See also <A HREF="http://develop.consumerium.org/wiki/Humptydumptyism" REL="nofollow">this page</A> which links Humpty Dumptyism with the tactics certain people.Peter Kirkhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13395635409427347613noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11875966.post-35293616251277355082007-04-02T18:06:00.000-07:002007-04-02T18:06:00.000-07:00Excuse me. I deleted my own comment. I didn't real...Excuse me. I deleted my own comment. I didn't realize, Peter, that Henry Liddell was the same Henry Liddell - neat. No wonder I am so fond of Humpty Dumpty!Suzanne McCarthyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07033350578895908993noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11875966.post-70569319966058429872007-04-02T03:26:00.000-07:002007-04-02T03:26:00.000-07:00Thank you, Suzanne.I wonder if one of the reasons ...Thank you, Suzanne.<BR/><BR/>I wonder if one of the reasons why Grudem and others have misunderstood LS is that they, reading in the late 20th century, understood "man" and "men" in this lexicon to be gender specific words, whereas the 19th century lexicographers (including Henry Liddell, the alleged prototype of Lewis Carroll's Humpty Dumpty) often intended "man" in a gender generic sense, especially when writing things like "man, opp. god".Peter Kirkhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13395635409427347613noreply@blogger.com