I posted this in the other thread but here is a good place sinc eyou asked for Jewish soruces.
If you really need outside sources ( as opposed to the ones Metacrock already provided which proves me right) try these by the way.
This is the one I used first. It's on Doxa. It says Breast, it does not say you are right. It does not confirm your view. you are confusing diversity of opinion with support for you. You can't work it that way. you can't say if there's a disagreement among scholars that proves you are right. No it does not! It proves they don't know.
Maybe if you weren't so hung up on being right all the time you could think properly.
this really saddens me greatly. I see that you are so totally dishonest, youo are distorting the facts, and twisting the sources.
Note: I know you’ll read part of this as confirmation of your Bias, but just because it says “Provider and sustainers” doesn’t mean “Womans breast as she provides and sustains her baby”. Men were providers and sustainers, too, and nothing conotate nursing.
Just because feminists may like that idea doesn't' make it wrong and it doesn't' disprove it. that is no way to do linguistics. that's nothing more than twisting the truth in order to support your political bull shit.
your little quip about confirmation bias (I really thought you were above cheap atheist tricks) is nothing more than what you are dong and you know it. you practically admitted it. You actually tired to use it as an argument.
Not a scholarly source. He's just repeating the standard BS that he got form the same sources you used already so that doesn't' count as anything.
This is another article on it.
the accadian word that the one before Lustsky mentions has always been linked to breast.
Note, this one even mentions Harriet Lutzky, and says she’s a Professor of Psychology, not a Hebrew Scholar. Her “Evidence” was base don her own biases, but picked up by those who want to show off their tolerance and diversity and how modern they are.
Before her, no one connected El Shaddai with motherly imagery.
Here are a few more Jewish Sources.
http://www.ou.org/torah/tt/5762/vaera62 ... atures.htm
that hardly demonstrates that she is the only one who thinks that. you are still playing dishonest games by trying to built guilt by association. The shrink this this not the linguist. that doesn't mean other linguists don't think so too.
My evidence mentioned her but it did not use her as the evidence. It was a dialogue and the evidence came from a language student and he appealed to the Tendrils Hebrew dictionary.
VERY VERY Dishonest!
you just conveniently ignore every single quote I used so that way you can foment the illusion that all the scholars sport you and all the feminists support me.
blue Letter bible!
Blue letter Bible agrees with me!
you do not have a single source on a par with that in your whole arsenal. Most of your sources are not scholarly. I quoted two Hebrew dictionaries and a Christian dictionary and several scholars and references to Talmidic rabbis.