14,172
edits
No edit summary |
m (Text replacement - " " to ":") |
||
Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
I also began to use Strong's Concordance and Harris' Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament to explore the meanings behind Hebrew words. However, my observations quickly led me to a troubling conclusion: much of the material I encountered was unreliable. The Theological Wordbook, for example, was based on the modern system of vowel markings (nikud), which were only introduced in 600 AD. This was a problem, as Jesus never saw these vowels. The references in the book often included phrases like: | I also began to use Strong's Concordance and Harris' Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament to explore the meanings behind Hebrew words. However, my observations quickly led me to a troubling conclusion: much of the material I encountered was unreliable. The Theological Wordbook, for example, was based on the modern system of vowel markings (nikud), which were only introduced in 600 AD. This was a problem, as Jesus never saw these vowels. The references in the book often included phrases like: | ||
:4a – Assumed root… | |||
:1a – Assumed root… | |||
:27a – Assumed root… | |||
In essence, the book admitted that many of its conclusions were speculative at best, and they made up a great deal of the information. I didn’t want to rely on guesses and assumptions, especially when studying the language of Scripture. | In essence, the book admitted that many of its conclusions were speculative at best, and they made up a great deal of the information. I didn’t want to rely on guesses and assumptions, especially when studying the language of Scripture. |