Joseph, You are right, so maybe we must give a more general translation like "monster".
Jan Pieter van de Giessen http://www.bijbelaantekeningen.nl/blog/ On Mon, 29 Aug 2011 19:54:45 -0700, Joseph Roberts wrote > I think that the word would have to have a meaning understood by the > people of that day, Whether you are a secular student of the Tanakh > or a fervent believer in the text, I think both should reach the > conclusion that the text was written in the everyday language of > time period in which it was penned. So if the KJV translators > translated it as "dragon" from their understanding of the world at > their time, at best this would be a dynamic equivalent. I think the > million dollar question is "What did the Hebrew speaking person from > that era understand that word to mean when he picked up the text and > read it." Of course maybe we can not piece together the meaning of > the word from the available information, maybe it is just a general > word for a group of creatures rather than a specific creature or > species. The LXX seems to use a word for a half-donkey half-man > called an "onocentaur." Thanks, -Joseph Roberts _______________________________________________ b-hebrew mailing list [email protected] http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew
