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

Re: [lxx] Re: LXX and Genesis chronology

Expand Messages
  • Joel Kalvesmaki
    Dear all, ... I m sorry if this is more tantalizing than informative, but I recall reading a study (was it in the Harvard Theological Review?), from the 80 s,
    Message 1 of 23 , Dec 12, 2002
    • 0 Attachment
      Dear all,

      > I had read comments on this back a couple hundred years -- I did not
      > find it in the Church Father's, (yet) but I've not found anything on
      > the web I couldn't find in Clarke's commentary. (A nice detailed

      I'm sorry if this is more tantalizing than informative, but I recall reading
      a study (was it in the Harvard Theological Review?), from the 80's, I think,
      presenting a strong case for how the LXX, the MT, and the Samaritan text's
      version of the pre-Noahic genealogies depend on each other. Note, all three
      versions diverge from each other. If I recall correctly, the author
      suggested that no priority should be ascribed to any single text for an
      "Ur-genealogy." Each version has reflects a change from the autograph.

      I've lost this reference in my files, but I know that I passed it on to
      James Miller a couple of years back. Maybe he still has that reference.

      Best wishes,

      jk
      untitledJoel Kalvesmaki 16kalvesmaki@...
      http://students.cua.edu/16kalvesmaki/ Graduate Student, Early Christian
      Studies Catholic University of America Washington, DC
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.