@GeminiMan I was tempted to only add this week's to see what you'll come up with for the next few, but I've gone ahead and queued up the rest of sefer B'reishit.

@MonicaCellio It only took three hints :)

@Shokhet I had another one of my unfinished answer losses. This time, I forgot to change the credit card info on our internet service when our card got replaced, and I lost my internet connection for a few minutes, along with my unfinished answers.

@YeZ Oh, c'mon! :(

@Shokhet I think it's my minhag to lose partially typed up answers.

:(

Not always:

;-)

How often d'you think someone will edit a post, re-jargonifying to clarify? ;-)

@MonicaCellio That was me.

@YeZ When i used Firefox, there was an extension called Lazarus that would save stuff you entered into forms (such as SE post boxes), so that if it got lost, you could recover it.

I haven't found something like that for Chrome though. :(

@MonicaCellio @GeminiMan Oh, I had no idea what those pictures were supposed to be.

@msh210 I didn't understand the first one (which was posted twice) at all. It was the "lost" in the second one that did it for me.

@MonicaCellio I only got the first one afterthefact. I still don't get what "lost" has to do with anything.

@Scimonster I got the first one after the fact too. I don't know what he intended, but when I saw "lost" I made the connection to "missing", as in "this event is missing from our front page".

@Scimonster @YeZ chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/lazarus-form-recovery/…

@Yishai Oh, I just realized why it's called that. Man, am I slow lately.

@msh210 And here we were thinking you had Ruach HaKodesh.

@YeZ Off and on.

@msh210 I'd much sooner excuse you for not recognizing a character from Christian lore than for not recognizing the translated title of Parashat Hashavua' ;^)

@IsaacMoses Indeed! So would I.

@IsaacMoses @msh210 I'm actually somewhat curious how you came to figure it out...

@IsaacMoses Unfortunately, I "got" the former myself (though late); the latter needed to be explained to me.

@YeZ Which one?

@msh210 the one you got yourself.

@YeZ He's a famous character. Wikipedia even notes: "In referring to John's account of the resurrection of Lazarus, the name Lazarus is often used to connote apparent restoration to life. For example, the scientific term 'Lazarus taxon' denotes organisms that reappear in the fossil record after a period of apparent extinction; and the Lazarus phenomenon refers to an event in which a person spontaneously returns to life (the heart starts beating again) after resuscitation has been given up."

@IsaacMoses, all, can I un-featured the call for second-party edits now that all the posts are struck through?

@msh210 Fine with me. Thanks!

Okay, done.

@msh210 Famous is a relative term.

Incidentally, here's a great opportunity for anyone who has not already participated in editing content for Chanuka - Mi Yodeya?: There are two planned rounds of proofreading of the final document (~18 pages), one coming in a few days, and the other coming in a couple of weeks. If you have a good eye for detail and a bit of time, we could use your help.

@IsaacMoses Is it desired that both proofreaders of a question be people who are neither its curator nor its editor?

@IsaacMoses I trust that msh210 recognized it (as did I), but just didn't know why it was being posted in here.

@MonicaCellio Not even. I don't translate "tol'dos" in my head as "generations", and didn't recognize it as a parasha name until chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/468?m=18636556#18636556.

@msh210 Same here.

@msh210 What's worked well for previous publications was a single proofreader without previous contact with the project at all reading through the whole document.

@msh210 I mentally translate non sequitur chat messages by @GeminiMan automatically into mod-pings.

@IsaacMoses more like ~20 pages, no? Unless you're counting like g'mara. :-) (Eight two-sided dafim, plus a little more.)

@MonicaCellio Oh, right. Could you please edit my message to say 18 instead of 10?

@IsaacMoses oh. Heh, now that you mention it... good idea.

@IsaacMoses done.

@MonicaCellio Thanks

@IsaacMoses people reading the transcript sequentially will just have to cope. :-)

@MonicaCellio It should be 20, not 18, right?

Because of the cover

@Scimonster Not much there, though.

@Scimonster Cover and back have very little content to proofread. That's lost in the "~".

@YeZ I've heard of the guy (don't know the details of the story without looking up), but I hadn't made the connection to the browser add-on either. And I've been using that add-on for years.

@msh210 Yeah, actually first i thought 8*2=18, and then had to save face with that. :P

@Scimonster You can always ask a mod to edit your old chat message, and save face that way instead. cc @IsaacMoses :-)

@msh210 Or just delete it.

But i'll leave it. :P

@Scimonster There's the face you saved. With no nose, and a tongue sticking out on one side.

@msh210 Starred for the lolz factor.

@Scimonster Oh you'd already posted it before. I missed it. I'll go edit that previous message of yours, to save face.

@msh210 they get "Lazarus" from "Elazar"? I'd never noticed that. (I've also sometimes wondered if they base their story on the Shunemite woman's child somehow, but again, never dug into it.)

(In all seriousness, I wouldn't edit a chat message someone else posted without really good reason -- and then you could tell by clicking "history" in the message's menu.)

@msh210 likewise. I edited Isaac's (at his request) because the message is pinned and it's an important announcement, but for the most part we should all just live with our typos.

@MonicaCellio I don't know why. Latin has initial vowels in names (Octavius, Augustus). Maybe not "E"? Beats me.

@msh210 I wonder if it passed through Greek and, if so, if that matters. Greek doesn't have initial (or any?) voiced "h", which is how they get to "alleluia".

Don't know about other letters/sounds.

@MonicaCellio Apparently it's via Greek, yes.

@MonicaCellio The Christian Bible was written in Greek, no? That would make sense that it would change in the Hebrew => Greek -> Latin -> English.

@Scimonster yes. There are a few people out there who claim the primary source was Aramaic, but that's not the common view.

I also don't know, off-hand, if their Greek text for the Tanakh is exactly the Septuagint or if they made alterations.

I was listening, had to jump in on this conversation :)

@MonicaCellio I thought the Septuagint was written later, but i'm not sure.

(There are some specific places I would look for alterations, were I (a) proficient in Greek, (b) in possession of the right sources, and (c) motivated enough.)

It might have been to be able to compare the Jewish and Christian texts?

@MonicaCellio I have a and b, but maybe not c

@Scimonster it took a while for their canon to be finalized, same as ours.

@MonicaCellio I thought the Septuagint was written later, but i'm not sure.

But hey, @majnemɪzdæn can probably shed light on this. Hi!

@MonicaCellio hi (catching up, I only saw the tail end of this in the right column from another chat room)

@MonicaCellio I've asked.

@majnemɪzdæn yeah, just curiosity here.

(trying to find the original/big question)

@majnemɪzdæn (but if you're willing to check one, Isaiah 7:14. :-) )

@msh210 Why not on Linguistics?

@MonicaCellio oh, haha I can talk about that off the top of my head

@Scimonster Dunno, I just thought of that first. (I was a Wiktionarian long before I was a yodeyan.) Go ahead, though.

@majnemɪzdæn oh sorry. This started with a reference to Lazarus. I noticed that (according to Wikipedia) that comes from Elazar, which made us wonder what happened to the initial vowel. We know that Greek doesn't have a voiced initial 'h'; is it something like that with leading vowels too?

@majnemɪzdæn this was a tangent to the tangent -- is the Christian version (in Greek) of Tanakh the same as the Septuagint or are there other changes? And that's one place I would look for evidence.

@msh210 I don't know enough about Greek or vocalizations to formulate a good question.

GTG now.

But if the answer is "Christians use the Septuagint as their source for Tanakh", that answers the question.

TZT

@MonicaCellio ancient Greek used rough breathing marks to make the 'h' sound

Ah, so not completely silent. (I was thinking of "alleluia" losing its "h" sound.)

But that might have happened when it got to Latin?

@IsaacMoses I don't want to commit any specific time because my schedule waxes and wanes, but I'll help if I can.

@MonicaCellio the Septuagint (LXX) is the Greek Tanakh, and was thought to be compiled sometime between the 3rd and 2nd centuries BCE

I've gtg. Tzt, y'all.

the Torah was translated in the 3rd century, the rest likely in phases through about 130 BCE

@majnemɪzdæn thanks. And the LXX is what Christians consider authoritative for those books? Versus some other Greek edition, I mean.

@MonicaCellio well some scholars think it may not have been pronounced in Koine Greek, the dialect used in first century Judea and that much of the NT is written in

@MonicaCellio to put it bluntly, most Christians pick and choose what they find authoritative

@majnemɪzdæn fair enough.

@MonicaCellio the Masoretic Text wasn't compiled until much later in history, but there was an early shift (led by Jerome) towards using the Hebrew over the Greek

@majnemɪzdæn Jerome was ~4th century CE. Any idea what Hebrew sources he used?

Take Isaiah 7:14 as an example, the main controversy centering over the translation of 'young woman' / 'virgin', where the LXX has παρθένος (parthénos, 'virgin'), while the Hebrew עלמה (almah) only conveys the idea of a 'young woman.'

@MonicaCellio whatever he had available to him at the time. We can only speculate since he was making a translation into Latin, so we mostly have to infer his Hebrew sources from the Latin (Jerome translated the Vulgate, still authoritative in Roman Catholic Christianity)

but his Hexapla is being made available

check out hexapla.org

@MonicaCellio so back to Isaiah 7:14, while Christians often claim to use the Hebrew, most English translation use 'virgin' in this passage (following the Greek), because it best fits their theology (in fact, when the RSV first followed the Hebrew in the 70's I believe, it was trashed as a 'liberal' translation merely for being faithful to the Hebrew text)

very few are consistent

at the same time, the Masoretic Text is a much later compilation than the Septuagint, and they differ drastically in some places (and of course the LXX has quite a few additional interpolations and works which are clearly later Hellenic Jewish writings, i.e. the 'apocrypha' - which of course included the earliest historical references to the practice of Chanukkah)

@MonicaCellio the Gottingen Septuagint project used these as critical sources, but I can't afford these texts and apparatus

The earliest scriptural source; I don't know the comparative dating of the books of Macabees that we have and the part of the Babylonian talmud (g'mara, Shabbat 21 ad loc) that discusses Chanukah.

so it is out there, but not cheap nor easily accessible

@MonicaCellio good point

@majnemɪzdæn gotcha. Thanks for the education. (I chuckled at "young woman" being "liberal". :-) )

they'll eventually all be scanned and made available like ccat.sas.upenn.edu/rak//earlylxx/images/genizah/hexapla2.jpg

And thanks for explaining about Jerome; I didn't know if there was a known source or if it was being reverse-engineered from his translation or what.

@MonicaCellio yes, which is funny, because עלמה clearly refers to one of Isaiah's children in context

@MonicaCellio a bit of both

I remember once, a long time ago, asking a rabbi how we know that the torah we have is what God gave Moshe -- couldn't the chain of transmission have introduced errors even if everyone has the best intentions? He told me that there were Jewish communities that had been isolated early on (I think Yemen was one) where, when they eventually compared their sifrei torah to ours, there were very few differences. But I didn't ask for details at the time ("pictures or it didn't happen" :-) ).

I'm curious, now, what that might have referred to.

@MonicaCellio but don't get me started on Christian hermeneutics, I'd give Jesus an 'F', too :) (actually contemplated writing a meta post on BH.SE on why Jesus would get my DV if he posted an answer on that site)

@majnemɪzdæn yes. And I don't know the connotations of the Greek word used there, but consider the English word "maiden", which can refer to her sexual history but also sometimes just means "a young lass".

@MonicaCellio I think the prevailing consensus is King Hezekiah (among Jewish scholars), but there is some debate

@MonicaCellio Every so often in my chumash, i'll see a note that says "Teimanim: xyz"

@majnemɪzdæn laugh Yeah, this room wouldn't be the best place for that discussion anyway.

@msh210 meta.judaism.stackexchange.com/questions/2179/…

@MonicaCellio but you have to admit, it would be a fun meta post to write :P

@majnemɪzdæn oh definitely! And if you do write it I hope you'll share a link with me somewhere, because I might not see it otherwise. But I have the sneaking suspicion that you won't actually post it there.

@MonicaCellio Ooh, i wanna see too!

@Scimonster interesting. So that might have been what he was referring to. (I was pretty unlearned then, so if he did say something more specific it might have whooshed right over my head.)

@majnemɪzdæn do it! do it!

We triple dare you!

Ok, that's four people (I'm counting @majnemɪzdæn) who think it's a good idea. :-)

@MonicaCellio To be precise, I think it's an entertaining idea, not necessarily a good idea.

@MonicaCellio 10, if you count YEZ triple-daring for us as 3 each.

I'm for it nonetheless.

@YeZ same here ;)

@YeZ fair enough.

@YeZ Well, metas don't have rep, so, can't hurt, right?

@Scimonster true. If it gets dangerously close to the -8 that kicks it off the front page, we can make accounts over there and upvote it. :-)

My first point would be Mark 2:25-26. We can see clearly that the high priest at this time was Ahimelech, not Abiathar. Jesus names the wrong high priest. And used out of context for the argument -- it wasn't the Sabbath when David and his companions ate that bread.

@MonicaCellio I was just going to cleverly reference your account over there, but it's gone!

@YeZ gone indeed!

@YeZ I noticed that too.

@MonicaCellio Where'd it go?

@MonicaCellio unless it's just gone quiet. :)

@YeZ very quiet.

@majnemɪzdæn interesting. I haven't read the Mark passage, but is there some reason that it works better with the wrong high priest? Or is it just a goof?

@YeZ Thanks! I'll ping you when there's a document to proofread, and you can see if you'll be able to do it. We should be able to allow a full week's window in which to get the proofreading done.

@MonicaCellio it appears to be an error to me. And also even if he got it right, it doesn't support his argument (by BH.SE standards), because it didn't take place on the Sabbath

it's a good text to use as an example for a) incorrect answer, and b) not showing work

hence earning Jesus' hypothetical answer a DV ;)

but again, that would stir up some trouble

@majnemɪzdæn yeah, the argument doesn't work anyway (for the reason you said). I couldn't think of, say, a political motive to retroject a different person there, but Christian bible is really not my field.

@MonicaCellio that was done through the powers that be?

@majnemɪzdæn indeed, it serves double duty: incorrect and unsupported.

@MonicaCellio but there are some other issues, and it's been addressed before

@majnemɪzdæn true.

@YeZ whistles innocently

@MonicaCellio doesn't follow

@MonicaCellio Why didn't you want to be associated with BH anymore? I mean, i've read your profile, but to get rid of it all?

@YeZ a very kind person at SE was able to disconnect that account from my network profile. That that's me is of course not a secret (too many witnesses if nothing else), but it at least breaks the association for Joe Googler, which helps enormously. I couldn't just delete the account because I feel a custodial duty for the posts I, in retrospect erroneously, made there -- if someone edits them I want to know.

@MonicaCellio Aha. I got most of that but was wondering how it was accomplished. Is that account somehow different than a normal one? There isn't even a reputation tab in the profile.

Oh nvm I was looking at meta profile which is where your link sent me.

@MonicaCellio You don't happen to be the very person you link to in your profile, do you?

@Scimonster I feel that my participation there helps promote the Christian evangelical nature of the site. I do not believe that the site is living up to its stated goal of being a non-doctrinal place for open discourse and scholarship. I feel they want Jewish participants so that they can think of themselves (and pitch themselves) as not being a Christian site.

@YeZ right -- the "about" info is the same on meta and main, so why drive traffic to main? You know how to get there if you really want to.

@MonicaCellio "They want our posts but don't welcome us."

@MonicaCellio yeah a good point. (Last question, I promise sort of) did you have to manually go through each of your answers and add the disclaimer footer, or was that somehow done for you?

@Scimonster this might help explain.

@YeZ I did it manually.

@MonicaCellio (this is a follow up so it doesn't count) in one shot? or spread out over time?

@YeZ Check the edit dates. ;)

So from this conversation and looking at the link above, i can infer that it is indeed you.

Yes.

@MonicaCellio Unmasked!

@YeZ as I said, it's not something it would be possible to hide anyway. My biggest concern is with outbound links -- people going from that profile to me. Hence the different blog and email address. There were already inbound links, like from here, and it's not worth trying to scrub those.

(Also, I'm pretty sure Google doesn't index chat -- or, rather, that SE instructs Google not to and Google complies.)

@MonicaCellio Right, I think anyone coming from your profile here would catch it pretty quickly. Humorously enough, I had seen that profile before and thought "hey this is very similar to Monica's profile here!" and didn't realize it was a reincarnation until I just tried to find your profile there.

@YeZ right. I'm not trying to hide it from people here, but I worded it a little obliquely in my MY profile because of Google.

I figure that the regulars, and people who know me, know, and to the rest it's just an anonymous person on the Internet anyway so it doesn't much matter if it's the same or a different person.

@Scimonster You could also see the post where someone apologizes to "Monica" and Gone Quiet accepts the apology.

@YeZ Yup, saw that one.

I'm disappointed that GQ hasn't picked up any upvotes as a result of this conversation. :-) (Just kidding!)

@MonicaCellio :P

@MonicaCellio They would have, but i followed their advice and didn't join BH. ;)

@majnemɪzdæn remember: meta is often more important than main, and several people who've felt unwelcome have deleted their accounts (and thus their votes).

@Scimonster good. Better to stay away.

@MonicaCellio I've got my one answer there with its two upvotes. Go me.

(Also, not really encouraging sockpuppets or the appearance of same...)

@YeZ oh, you're there? I hadn't noticed. (Or if I did I forgot. Now I have to look to see if I left you a comment or something. :-) )

@MonicaCellio You didn't, his only post is from this year

Ironically, msh has the other answer to that post.

@YeZ I noticed. :P

@YeZ ah, you posted after I left. (So I didn't even give you a vote. Sorry 'bout that.)

@MonicaCellio Look who didn't read GQ's profile.

@MonicaCellio Yes, and it was in response to someone (maybe Jon Ericson or Caleb) coming in to Bam and requesting some help with the question.

@Scimonster well, he might have read but disagreed.

@YeZ makes sense.

@Scimonster Just noticed that i forgot that he lowercased the E...

@Scimonster And i find it funny when i get alerts for these self-replies. :P

Okay, it's after 11 and i DON'T want to wake up at 10am again. Good night!

@Scimonster the cost of telling you something you already know is lower than the cost of the increased code complexity to handle it, I'd guess. :-)

@Scimonster TZT!

@Scimonster toodles

I was going to ask my first how-to question today, but I forget what it was.

@YeZ oops. Are there any specifically-Jewish mneumonic methods? You could ask about those. :-)

@YeZ Dupe:

@IsaacMoses Oh, I had forgotten about that question! :)

Just went back to accept the answer here. Backstory for that post is that that day, that happened to me. I had forgotten the halacha, did the wrong thing, and looked it up later. Hopefully posting it on MY will help me remember next time :)

Seeing that message was no excuse for voting!! Lol :)

This message, currently in the star chart, looks like it has ten stars ( @Scimonster )

1,000 shoulda bolded the number at the beginning

@Shokhet ^^^

@IsaacMoses Like that? (see star chart now ;)

Nobody else better star that message!

@Shokhet I WIN CHAT!

@IsaacMoses :D

@IsaacMoses Don't edit that message!!

@Shokhet Now, it's more-star-proofed

The edited version is more forward-looking, but I removed my star once I realized what I'd done (pre-edit).

1,000,000 Have there ever been 1,000 people in this room at the same time? How about a million?

@Shokhet Apparently

@IsaacMoses I won betterer ;-)

@IsaacMoses :)

∞ 8^P

@IsaacMoses Bold the thingy

infinity sign

@Shokhet I did. It's just not very bold

@IsaacMoses Oh well.

TZT

TZT!

I got 200 rep again on MSE today -- it doesn't feel as good without the badge :P

@Shokhet do it 48 more times and you get another badge! (I don't know my progress toward that on MSE. I suspect I've only capped about 10 times. Today I probably won't -- 50 away and an hour and a bit to go.)

@MonicaCellio Yeah. I haven't done it on MY yet; though I've come close (190 was my top score in a single day, IIRC)

Just went to the close vote queue:

I don't know if people usually read all the comments on questions in the queue; but if this comment got some upvotes it would be more visible, at least.

@Shokhet I try to, if there aren't too many of them.