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)
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)
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
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)
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)
From fork-admin@xent.com  Mon Aug 26 15:32:30 2002

Remember I didn't say it was necessarily a good source, just that it
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
> From: James Tauber [mailto:jtauber@jtauber.com]
> On Sat, 24 Aug 2002 11:07:00 -0700, "John Hall" <johnhall@evergo.net>
> > Ran across a site which claimed to explain the original meaning of
> > Ten Commandments.  It seems some of those meanings have evolved a
> By "meanings have evolved" do you [or they] mean that the Hebrew words
> have changed meaning or that our understanding of the Hebrew words
> changed? Or do they posit a pre-Mosaic form of the laws that had
> > In particular, there was a claim that the commandment on stealing
> > actually specifically about 'man stealing -- selling a free man into
> 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
> > I'm sure most everyone is familiar with the argument that the
> > is 'thou shalt not murder' rather than 'kill,'
> This has nothing to do with successive translations. It is based on
> knowledge of the meaning of the Hebrew word "ratsach". Most modern
> translations I've seen translate it "murder" but elsewhere the word is
> of an animal killing a human (something for which most English