Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site unc.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!security!genrad!grkermit!masscomp!clyde!floyd!harpo!eagle!mh3bs!mhtsa!exodus!gamma!ulysses!unc!tim
From: tim@unc.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.religion
Subject: Re: "G-d" and destroying holy names - reposting of the rules
Message-ID: <6458@unc.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 21-Dec-83 20:04:50 EST
Article-I.D.: unc.6458
Posted: Wed Dec 21 20:04:50 1983
Date-Received: Sat, 24-Dec-83 11:26:18 EST
References: <2971@utcsrgv.UUCP>
Organization: CS Dept., U. of N. Carolina at Chapel Hill
Lines: 11

I must be crazy to argue with a lawyer, but...

Dave, I never said that translating the Hebrew YHVH form as "G-d" was a
translation into normal English, only that it was a translation.  Given
this, your argument about the difference between "G-d" and normal English
doesn't really hold water.  If there is some difference between translating
a word and finding a readily comprehensible substitute, I don't know what it
is.  Care to try again?
--
Tim Maroney, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
duke!unc!tim (USENET), tim.unc@csnet-relay (ARPA)