/>/>/>/>/> If my claim is false could you please explain how much of the vocabulary has changed ?
Sorry Janey, you are not going to get out of it that easily. You first asked what percentage of the vocabulary had changed. Ev and I said we didn't know what percentage had changed. You then completely changed what we said, and claimed 'either you or Ev have any idea how much of the vocabulary had changed'. That is false. Just because we couldn't give a percentage, doesn't mean we don't know how much has changed. I have already given you abundant evidence providing a good understanding of how much has changed; as I said, by the end of the 19th century all Greek lexicons had been made obsolete, and most Hebrew lexicons. By the 1950s, all Greek and Hebrew lexicons were again obsolete. That's how much of the vocabulary changed. For specific detail, please read the pages and pages of documentation I provided in those PDFs, none of which you have even bothered to download.
I have downloaded them and will read hopefully later today.
If you don't know what percentage then how do you declare such as Genesius obsolete? If his definition of a word has not changed then it it is not obsolete; just because Hebrew Scholars (who have a living to make of course) declare a whole work obsolete why do you believe them unless you know what word meanings are supposed to have changed?
But is it not the case that non-biblical texts only make up 15% of the source material of Ancient Hebrew texts & the Biblical texts 85%?
Relevance?
If only 15% of the texts relied upon by Hebrew Scholars is non-biblical then there is a relatively small amount of material to base sweeping re:analysis of what words mean.