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

Re: [lxx] Re: Are there existing Bibles which use the LXX for the O.T.?

Expand Messages
  • fivefree@aol.com
    In a message dated 10/9/2008 10:10:30 A.M. Mountain Daylight Time, dantiller2001@yahoo.com writes: Kevin, I m also interested in the NETS, but there s one
    Message 1 of 16 , Oct 9, 2008
    View Source
    • 0 Attachment
      In a message dated 10/9/2008 10:10:30 A.M. Mountain Daylight Time,
      dantiller2001@... writes:

      Kevin,
      I'm also interested in the NETS, but there's one thing (other than the
      Greek name renderings already mentioned) putting me off: The
      translation philosophy of the NRSV, which this is based on.


      Thank you for this information. I did not know this and will stay away from
      it also. Political philosophies such as political correctness have no
      business influencing text translations.

      J.M. Jackson

      **************New MapQuest Local shows what's happening at your destination.
      Dining, Movies, Events, News & more. Try it out
      (http://local.mapquest.com/?ncid=emlcntnew00000002)


      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • Kevin P. Edgecomb
      Mr Jackson and others, below you will find the specific section from the NETS introduction, To the Reader, (pp xv-xvi) which describes the relationship
      Message 2 of 16 , Oct 10, 2008
      View Source
      • 0 Attachment
        Mr Jackson and others, below you will find the specific section from the
        NETS introduction, "To the Reader," (pp xv-xvi) which describes the
        relationship between NETS and NRSV. Note especially number 5 in the second
        paragraph, regarding gender-based language. Note especially the last two
        sentences of the first paragraph, which explicitly state that although the
        NRSV was used as a kind of model, it "has not been allowed to interfere with
        faithfulness to the Greek text." There is hardly a way to make it any
        clearer. The goal in using the NRSV's language in NETS was as a study aid.
        Where the Hebrew/Aramaic and Greek texts are similar, and the Greek text
        allows it, the language of the NRSV was in theory preferred (though not
        always in practice, to be sure) for the benefit of side by side reading.
        The idea was that those who have no Hebrew, Aramaic, or Greek would perceive
        the differences between the Masoretic Text and the Septuagint through their
        translations in the NRSV and NETS respectively. This was a noble goal, but
        apparently more difficult to implement, as it is quite apparent that the
        NETS translation is very much different than the NRSV in precisely those
        Hebrew/Aramaic books, even where the language is quite close. Worries about
        use of the NRSV as a slightly altered boilerplate in the NETS are
        unwarranted. That is, however, precisely the case with the NKJV and the new
        Orthodox Study Bible, wherein the NKJV text was in many books only slightly
        altered toward the LXX, while other books were fully translated from the
        Greek; that one is a mixed bag of not very fresh greens.

        [quote] NETS AS MODIFIED NRSV

        Two considerations have guided the Committee in choosing an English version
        as the base text for NETS: (1) general compatibility of translational
        approach with that of the LXX itself and (2) widespread use among readers of
        the Bible. The New Revised Standard Version, based as it is on the maxim "as
        literal as possible, as free as necessary" (Preface), was thought to be
        reasonably well suited to NETS purposes on both counts. Consequently,
        throughout those Septuagint books which have extant counterparts in Hebrew
        (or Aramaic), NETS translators have sought to retain the NRSV to the extent
        that the Greek text, in their understanding of it, directs or permits. NETS'
        synoptic aim, however, has not been allowed to interfere with faithfulness
        to the Greek text.



        When NETS differs from the NRSV, the reason is typically one of the
        following: (1) the lexical choice of the NRSV to represent the Hebrew
        differs significantly from that of the Greek translator's, even though
        either rendering, independently, might be regarded as an adequate
        translation of the same Hebrew; (2) differences in translational approach
        between the translators of the NRSV and the ancient Greek translators has
        occasioned noteworthy differences between the two versions, (for example, in
        any given passage, the Greek might be hyper-literalistic, where the NRSV is
        not, or again it might be very free, which the NRSV is not); (3) an attempt
        to reflect linguistic features in the Greek, such as word echoes or
        paratactic style, at times has required that the NRSV wording be modified;
        (4) the Greek translator has apparently rendered a text at variance with MT,
        due to textual difference; (5) the NRSV has opted for gender-inclusive or
        explicit language, eschewed by NETS; (6) the NRSV has not translated MT, but
        opted instead for some other reading. Naturally, where, in such instances,
        the NRSV has adopted the reading of the Septuagint, NETS and NRSV agree. As
        a rule such cases have been annotated in the NRSV, but the reader should not
        take for granted that the precise English word used by the NRSV has been
        adopted by NETS.



        The Committee's desire to enable the reader to make use of NETS in synoptic
        manner with the NRSV has been second only to its commitment to giving a
        faithful rendering of the Greek original. In fact, NETS may be said to have
        two competing aims: (1) to give as faithful a translation of the Greek as is
        possible, both in terms of its meaning and in terms of its mode of
        expression and (2) to create a tool in English for the synoptic study of the
        Hebrew and Greek texts of the Bible. Since these are competing aims, the
        translator often, especially on the expression side, has been called upon to
        do a balancing act. [unquote]



        Regards,

        Kevin P. Edgecomb

        Berkeley, California



        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      • everard johnston
        Many thanks for the clarification. Everard Johnston. ... From: Peter Papoutsis To: lxx@yahoogroups.com Sent: Thursday, October 9, 2008
        Message 3 of 16 , Oct 10, 2008
        View Source
        • 0 Attachment
          Many thanks for the clarification.

          Everard Johnston.



          ----- Original Message ----
          From: Peter Papoutsis <papoutsis1@...>
          To: lxx@yahoogroups.com
          Sent: Thursday, October 9, 2008 6:34:00 PM
          Subject: Re: [lxx] Re: Are there existing Bibles which use the LXX for the O.T.?


          What Kevin said is correct. Sorry for not being clear.
           
          Peter A. Papoutsis

          ----- Original Message ----
          From: Kevin P. Edgecomb <kevin@bombaxo. com>
          To: lxx@yahoogroups. com
          Sent: Thursday, October 9, 2008 4:41:03 PM
          Subject: Re: [lxx] Re: Are there existing Bibles which use the LXX for the O.T.?

          Relatedly, Mr Johnston, the Orthodox Study Bible (both editions)
          simply includes the New Testament in the New King James Version. It
          was not a new translation at all. Peter is describing the basis of
          the NKJV.

          Regards,
          Kevin P. Edgecomb
          Berkeley, California

          Quoting everard johnston <ejohnston105@ yahoo.com>:

          > Many thanks to you, Peter.
          >  
          > Everard Johnston.
          >
          >
          >
          > ----- Original Message ----
          > From: Peter Papoutsis <papoutsis1@ yahoo. com>
          > To: lxx@yahoogroups. com
          > Sent: Thursday, October 9, 2008 1:50:08 PM
          > Subject: Re: [lxx] Re: Are there existing Bibles which use the LXX
          > for the O.T.?
          >
          >
          > The OSB uses the traditional Textus Receptus Greek New Testament and
          > NOT the Official Greek New Testament as authorized by the
          > Patriarchate of Constandinople. The Official text and TR are about
          > 95% accurate, but have some differences. For example Revelations
          > Ch.8:13 reads "Eagle" in the Constandinople Text, but "Angel" in the
          > TR Greek New Testament. Certain place names are different between
          > the texts, and certain sentence structures are different between the
          > two texts that slightly change meaning, as well as different
          > section headings and division of verses.
          >
          > I'll get you a proper list later tonight. my personal e-mail is
          > Papoutsis1@yahoo. com so we can discuss this matter and not get
          > off-topic.
          >  
          > Peter A. Papoutsis


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






          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.