1870RE: [lxx] Re: Luke 3:36 and the LXX
- Dec 22, 2005Sorry about the wrong QYNN. I was thinking of the son of Enosh, not the son of Shem. My mistake.
Let's try again.
Jubilees 7 is not preserved in the Qumran fragments.
However, the Genesis Apocryphon lists the sons of Shem at 1QapGen 12:11. The beginning of the list has been lost, but the end is there. The list is in the same order as the LXX, so fortunately we can see where the KAINAN would have been at the end of the list. It is not there. We have: ...WR )RPK$D LWD W)RM WBNN NQBN XM$ (...ur Arpachshad Lud and Aram and five daughters). No QYNN.
Ken Penner, McMaster/DSS
Dead Sea Scrolls scholars' list owner, http://mailman.McMaster.CA/mailman/listinfo/g-megillot
> -----Original Message-----
> From: firstname.lastname@example.org [mailto:email@example.com] On
> Behalf Of Wieland Willker
> Sent: December 22, 2005 4:20 AM
> To: LXX-List
> Subject: [lxx] Re: Luke 3:36 and the LXX
> > The relevant fragment is 11Q12 2. Only a few letters > from
> each line have been preserved. These letters are
> > compatible with the Ethiopic text at 4:13-14, but
> > QYNN's name would have fallen in parts of lines 2
> > and 3 that have been lost.
> But this is not the Cain we are talking about, in chapter 4
> we have the story of Cain and Abel. We need a Cain in Jub.
> ch. 7, where I read in the online version:
> "And these are the sons of Shem: Elam, and Asshur, and
> Arpachshad -this (son) was born two years after the flood-
> and 19 Lud, and Aram."
> No Cain, which is consistent with the Masoretic text.
- << Previous post in topic Next post in topic >>