Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

3733Re: [lxx] 2 Sam 23:1

Expand Messages
  • Drew Longacre
    Oct 14, 2011
      Hi John,
       
      I'd be skeptical, because of the grammatical reasons already mentioned.
       
      Additionally, the lack of the article before "anointed" in the Greek probably is more natural if understood as David being appointed as the Lord's anointed, rather than the oracle being about "the" Messianic anointed one.
       
      Also, the LXX does not translate the Hebrew ne'um as "oracle," but rather as "faithful," with reference to David. This further indicates that the LXX did not understand the anointed as the Messiah, because the phrase cannot even be taken to refer to the oracle at all, but is part of David's introduction of himself. In order for the phrase to mean that the oracle is "concerning the Messiah," it would have to be attached grammatically to the "last words of David" rather than a further description of David's faithfulness in the LXX.
       
      -Drew


      ________________________________
      From: John Milton <johnisaacmilton@...>
      To: lxx@yahoogroups.com
      Sent: Friday, October 14, 2011 6:17 PM
      Subject: Re: [lxx] 2 Sam 23:1

      Hi Drew,

      Just to follow up - I was intrigued with a note in John Sailhamer's
      Introduction to OT Theology (pp 215-23?) where he make mention of the LXX
      reading it as concerning or about. This makes the 'oracle' of David  about
      the anointed or concerning the anointed of the God . . . It seems like a
      stretch, however Sailhamer is expert on LXX translation. What do you think?

      Best,

      J

      On Fri, Oct 14, 2011 at 11:29 AM, Drew Longacre <drewlongacre@...>wrote:

      > **
      >
      >
      > Hi John,
      >
      > I would say for starters that such a use of the pronoun seems unlikely in
      > the Hebrew. "heqim 'al" is usually used for someone being established as an
      > authority over someone or else as an enemy against someone. Neither of these
      > fits the context here, and it is intrinsically unlikely that the LXX would
      > have understood it any other way.
      >
      > As far as the Greek pronoun goes, Liddell and Scott mention both the
      > concepts of authority and enmity, but never a vague "concerning." The
      > "Greek-English Lexicon of the Septuagint" says exactly the same thing.
      > Unless you are prepared to say that David is set as an authority over or
      > enemy against the anointed, you would be hard-pressed to argue that epi +
      > accusative in this context means anything but how Brenton translated it.
      >
      > Thus, the translation "concerning" has problems on both the Hebrew and
      > Greek levels and is quite unlikely. Unless there are strong contextual
      > indicators to indicate otherwise, Brenton's translation should probably be
      > accepted. It seems like both the MT and LXX present David as the anointed in
      > 23:1.
      >
      > -Drew
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      > ________________________________
      > From: John Milton <johnisaacmilton@...>
      > To: lxx@yahoogroups.com
      > Sent: Friday, October 14, 2011 3:12 PM
      > Subject: Re: [lxx] 2 Sam 23:1
      >
      >
      > Hi Drew,
      >
      > Thanks for your response to my query. I am aware of Brenton's translation
      > and the fact that translating the epi as concerning  would not align with
      > the MT. However, it seems that the LXX is reading the 'al' as a preposition
      > and not with a disjunctive accent (as well as the Vulgate). I'm interested
      > to know if it is possible to translate the epi as 'concerning' without the
      > influence of Brenton's translation or the MT's late vocalized reading.
      > Perhaps there is more going on in the translation - like in the targumim or
      > the LXX of Jeremiah.
      >
      > Best,
      >
      > J
      >
      > On Fri, Oct 14, 2011 at 5:45 AM, Drew Longacre <drewlongacre@...
      > >wrote:
      >
      > > **
      >
      > >
      > >
      > > Hi John,
      > >
      > > Brenton translated the LXX phrase "and faithful the man whom the Lord
      > > raised up to be the anointed of the God of Jacob." The epi is probably
      > not
      > > to be translated "about" or "concerning," because that would seem to
      > imply
      > > that the anointed is one other than David, which in this context does not
      > > fit well. There appear to be significant differences in the Greek texts
      > as
      > > well, which must be considered. The MT, however, breaks the sentence up
      > > between'al and meshiah. Another complicating factor is that 4QSam(a)
      > reads
      > > heqim 'el mashiah in this verse. The Hiphil clearly aligns with the LXX
      > > against the MT.
      > >
      > > The LXX text could probably be reconstructed in one of two ways:
      > >
      > > 1) heqim 'el mashiah as in 4QSam(a), "whom God raised up to be the
      > > anointed..."
      > >
      > > 2) heqim 'al mashiah, "whom he [secondarily explicated with "the Lord"]
      > > raised up to be the anointed..."
      > >
      > > The first reconstruction is probably more grammatical in Hebrew, but the
      > > second accounts more easily for the Greek epi.
      > >
      > > Have fun!
      > >
      > > Drew Longacre
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > > ________________________________
      > > From: John Milton <johnisaacmilton@...>
      > > To: lxx@yahoogroups.com
      > > Sent: Friday, October 14, 2011 3:49 AM
      > > Subject: [lxx] 2 Sam 23:1
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > > I wondered if someone could give me an opinion of the LXX's rendering of
      > > the
      > > * 'al* ('on high') in 2 Sam 23:1. How would one translate the *epi* in
      > that
      > >
      > > verse? Also is the accent conjunctive or disjunctive? I'm interested to
      > > know
      > > if the *epi* could be translated as 'concerning' or 'about' as if it is
      > > reading the *'al *with a *patach* and not a *qamets* in the MT, changing
      > > the
      > > reading of *'al* as a substantive and instead reading it as a
      > >
      > > preposition. interesting
      > > variants? Any help would be great. Much Thanks.
      > >
      > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      > >
      > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      > >
      > >
      > >
      >
      > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      >
      > ------------------------------------
      >
      > Yahoo! Groups Links
      >
      >
      > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      >

      >


      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



      ------------------------------------

      Yahoo! Groups Links



      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • Show all 28 messages in this topic