FBF: Hare chews the cud - new info - inerrancy supported!

Squire Robertsson · Jan 28, 2004

The originator of this thread has requested:

Dear Moderator/Administrator
Please remove my hare/cud piece from your site. I made a big mistake in my hare/cud essay I wrote. I do not want to misinform people. Please remove it from your site. I am in the process of doing further research.
Sincerely,

Ken DeMyer
Click to expand...

I am loathe to fully comply with this request. I do not believe that making otherwise inoffensive threads disappear is the best course of action. This may embarass the writer, but that should cause each of us to pause before hitting the "Add Reply" button.

I am closing this thread for the time being.

Squire Robertsson · Jan 29, 2004

Brother DeMyer sends this explanation on the closure of this thread:

Dear Squire:
Actually the mistake is not that huge but I am somewhat of a perfectionist. I found out that the hyrax was not declared a ruminant by the Grzmik's Animal Life Encyclopedia. Grzmik said that hyraxes ruminate but they are not ruminants (an animal can ruminate but still not be declared a ruminant). However, Grzmik changed his 1975 view and by 2004 said Hyraxes do not chew the cud. But in the 1970's in the peer reviewed literature in Germany a rigorous study was done where they observed hyraxes for continuous 24 hour periods and determined hyraxes do chew the cud. But Gryzmik may have been aware of Hendrichs study and rejected it because they both apparently worked at the same place. The key question is do they work concurrently at that same place. And if Gryzmik rejected Hendrich's data why did he do so.

So technically I did not make a big mistake I am just unclear. I am doing further research. In short, I am not embarrassed by a mistake but just in a state of suspended judgement.

There are some language issues too and scholars are justifiably unsure if the actual Hebrew words should be translated chew the cud because that phrase is used so sparingly and time has obscured its meaning. In short, I want to do more research and be clear with people rather than say the hyrax may or may not chew the cud. I would rather say it probably does or does not chew the cud.

We are also somewhat unclear if the hyrax is the Biblical animal in question.

Sincerely,
Ken DeMyer
Click to expand...

or in short

Please post this at the end of the string in place of your last post to my string so the readers can make a fully informed decision if your system allows this of course. I misquoted Grzmik in regards to his opinion in 1975 and said he claimed the hyrax was a ruminant. Actually Grzmik said the hyrax ruminates which would still make the Bible correct. However, I did find out recently, although I did not verify it yet, that Grzmik reversed his opinion regarding hyrax cud chewing and published it in 2004 and said the hyrax does not chew the cud. But there is evidence from the 1960's that was published in a peer reviewed science journal (Hendrichs) that indicates that Grzmik perhaps should have not reversed his opinion. I am investigating this matter fully and seeing if Grzmik was aware of Hendrichs study and if so why he disagrees with Hendrich if he in fact is aware of it.
Click to expand...

FBF: Hare chews the cud - new info - inerrancy supported!

Squire Robertsson Administrator
Administrator

Squire Robertsson Administrator
Administrator

Useful Searches

FBF: Hare chews the cud - new info - inerrancy supported!

Squire Robertsson Administrator Administrator

Squire Robertsson Administrator Administrator

Squire Robertsson Administrator
Administrator

Squire Robertsson Administrator
Administrator