First human

• Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]

At 01:16 AM 3/31/98 -0800, Dave Gaban wrote:

>> 

>> My purpose on this list is not to teach elementary subjects

>> which anyone interested can look up for themselves. The word

>> 'insect' at the time the King James Bible was translated did

>> not mean a six-legged creature as it generally does now. The

>> word insect then and now includes such creatures as spiders,

>> ticks, and even centipedes. See _The Random House Dictionary

>> of the English Language, the Unabridged Edition_ and the

>> _Oxford Annotated Bible_.

>> 

> DAVE G.

>Oops, you made an error. The word "insect" does NOT  now include spiders

>and ticks (arachnida) that have eight legs while centipedes (Chilopoda)

>usually have 1 pair of legs per segment for a total of between 15 and

>177 pairs of legs (depending on species).


Bullshit. Obviously you failed to read the citation I gave, so
I'll quote it for you, teaching an elementary matter you could
have looked up for yourself instead of appearing as an ignorant
fool:

"insect, ... 2. (loosely) any small arthropod, such as a spider,
 tick, or centipede, having a superficial, general similarity to
 the _Insecta_..." _The Random House Dictionary of the English
 Language, the Unabridged Edition_, page 735.

You'd better learn the common meanings of words before attempting
to debate the meanings of words which is all this group's Biblical
criticisms seem to amount to. The word Insecta for the biological
genus is not the same word 'insect' used by educated speakers of
the English language. 

Dick Jones

• Previous message: First human
• Next message: First human
• Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]