Although I did not know the actual Hebrew word (I took Greek, but no Hebrew), I did know that "fish" is a generic term. I also believe that these texts are not to be treated as scientific treatises, so literal interpretation of any of them is likely to be misleading (IMHO). And although "fish" may not rule out a whale, too many modern people who think they know the biblical texts are certain that Jonah is said to be swallowed by a whale, which is simply not true. Just as they are "certain" that all the animals that boarded Noah's ark came in pairs.

(Jerome's contribution is interesting, but from your description, it sounds like he inserted his own interpretation. I'm woefully ignorant about anything having to do with the Vulgate, so I could be completely off-base. I'm just going by your description of "introducing" the new term.)

I think that you're right about Jerome, and that he offered a more plausible reading of the Hebrew text of Jonah--one abandoned by later translators in favor of 'fish' with its misleading taxonomic connotations.

Can we get back to baseball now? The Indians have several one-run games against the Twins to win over the next few days...

So we're arguing whether the report of a human being swallowed whole by a 'fish' and escaping to tell the story is more accurate if the 'fish' is a whale or some other non-mammal sea creature.

OK then... :rolleyes:

You don't find that believable? Well, how about the earth stopping its rotation so that the sun stays stationary in the sky so the "good guys" can finish off the battle? Or how about the "good guys" winning a battle as long as the leader holds his arms up in prayer? :D

And these are among the more believable things in there.

To quote an esteemed member:

Anyway, as rare as inside-the-park HR's are, there were two of them yesterday - one by Granderson of the Tigers, and one by Derrek Lee of the Cubs. I wonder if those Elias people have figured out how many times that has happened previously?

I also saw it was Lee's second of his career; the first happened back in 2003 against Jason Marquis when he was with Atlanta. And Marquis was pitching for the Cubs this time. ...Hmm...

You guys are really trying to coax me into a holiday from this site, aren't you?

Nowayinhell am I getting into that "virgin birth" thingy.

Need help packing your bags?

You quoted Chuck instead.

Just saying......

Btw, are the White Sox even trying anymore? It sureashell didn't look like it.

Hey, no reason to be so short with Chuck.

I didn't get a chance to see any of the games, but that was my impression. If this keeps up, I would think Ozzie could be wearing out his welcome in Chicago pretty quickly.

You know, it's really not his fault if no one can pitch anymore. It's not as if he's making poor game situation decisions. When the other team scores 10 or 12 runs per game regardless of who you put on the mound, there's not much you can do.

True.

But I've gotten the impression that some players are just "going through the motions" at this point, and that is definitely a manager's problem. Then there's Ozzie being Ozzie, which can be laughed off when the team is doing well, but rubs more people the wrong way when the team doesn't do well.

It usually isn't the manager's fault when a team doesn't do well, but the manager is usually the first to go.

Along with the GM, apparently, in Houston. Just two years after the Astros were in the World Series against the White Sox, manager Phil Garner, and GM Tim Purpura were fired today.

Should we do a poll as to which manager will be fired next? (Someone else may need to set it up; I've done my share of polls...)

Gentlemen, could we get back to the on-topic off-topic discussion of baseball?

Since we're discussing religion...check this out

http://comics.com/wash/opus/archive/...7082130946.jpg

(if you see someone walking towards you who looks angry & is carrying a backpack with wires & stuff hanging out of it run the other way. just sayin)