Introduce Karl W. Randolph.

Please introduce yourself here, if you haven't already.
Forum rules
Members will observe the rules for respectful discourse at all times!
Please sign all posts with your first and last (family) name.
Posts: 898
Joined: Sun Sep 29, 2013 12:51 am

Introduce Karl W. Randolph.

Postby kwrandolph » Mon Sep 30, 2013 4:00 pm

I studied Hebrew for one year at Bethany Lutheran College in Mankato, Minnesota, under Rudolph Honsey. A couple of years later I started reading Tanakh through cover to cover, an exercise I repeated so often I have lost count. I started with Biblia Hebreica, Davidson’s Analytical Lexicon, Gesenius’ Lexicon and Lisowski’s Concordance.

Along the way, I realized through analysis of how words are used as listed in Lisowski’s Concordance that the glosses in Gesenius’ lexicon, also in BDB and Davidson’s Analytical Lexicon, are not always accurate, so I started writing corrections in the margins, as well as pointers to synonyms, until they became so extensive that I realized that I had written my own dictionary. I then put my dictionary into digital form, continue to update it, and now offer it as a .pdf file to those who ask for it.

After reading Tanakh through a few times, I came to the conclusion that the grammatical picture, given in class and in other sources I had seen, is inaccurate. The Hebrew verbs conjugate for neither tense nor aspect, and only partially for mood. I include a proposed simple grammar as an appendix to my dictionary.

A note on theology, presented here merely to show people from where I come for the purpose of making clear what I say, and not as an attempt at proselytism (I figure that the members of this group have already heard all the proselytism arguments, so why bother?).

I take the Bible literally, as being accurate in all matters in its original autographs. Part of that literal understanding is to recognize when and how idioms, figures of speech, and literary devices are used—not recognizing those is not to take the text literally. I limit the accuracy to the original autographs, which, unfortunately, no longer exist, and copies that are extant have copyist errors, the overwhelming majority of which are minor and don’t change the main message of the text.

Therefore I totally and unequivocally reject the teachings of the Documentary Hypothesis, recognizing its roots in à priori belief in evolution, both biological and social. Evolution—the belief that all life had simple, common ancestors and developed by natural means over a long period of time—is not scientific but a religious belief, therefore is not to be mentioned further on this list. Likewise, the Documentary Hypothesis lacks historical evidence—none of the supposed original documents have been found—therefore is equally unhistorical and unscientific.

I understand the text as being historically accurate, with the same caveats as above. God acts into history, and this is the record of his actions so we can know about God and how we are to live. Therefore, the history needs to be accurate. However, as a history, it has a gap from Daniel to Nehemiah, where the number of years is not listed, and doesn’t list dates after the fall of Masada.

As a corollary, I consider the academically promoted histories to be inaccurate in so far as they contradict Bible. That is especially true of ancient Egyptian history, where, for example, the Amarna Letters, when cross-referenced to archaeology and history, date from the Iron Age Divided Kingdom era of Biblical history from about 800 BC, not the late Bronze Age of about 1200 BC. And that’s just one error.

These are my beliefs, and just as I don’t take offense when others promote Documentary Hypothesis and their beliefs on this list, so I listed these here to ask that people don’t take offense when I answer according to these beliefs, rather understand from where I make my answers.

Posts: 2
Joined: Tue Oct 01, 2013 12:59 pm

Re: Introduce Karl W. Randolph.

Postby Mpradio » Thu Oct 03, 2013 11:36 am

Nice to "meet" you, Karl!

Posts: 898
Joined: Sun Sep 29, 2013 12:51 am

Re: Introduce Karl W. Randolph.

Postby kwrandolph » Wed Oct 16, 2013 7:56 pm

I just noticed that I don’t have a way to contact me off list through this service.

My off list email is at gmail with the same name, kwrandolph.

Return to “Introductions”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest