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

Re: New ENTTC articles

Expand Messages
  • REElliott@aol.com
    To all TCer s (and Bob W too) I do appreciate the work that Bob (and others) has (have) done in conjunction with the ENTTC. I take this opportunity to remind
    Message 1 of 14 , Mar 3, 1997
    • 0 Attachment
      To all TCer's (and Bob W too)

      I do appreciate the work that Bob (and others) has (have) done in conjunction
      with the ENTTC. I take this opportunity to remind everyone that while the
      project is moving quite slowly now, (better than not at all) I am continuing
      to "keep the dream alive", thanks in part to the continued support that I
      receive from this list. Please continue to pray for the progress of this
      work.
      Again, thanks to all for your support and comments. I will keep you posted!

      Rich Elliott
    • Ronald L. Minton
      I was recently reading Archer and Ch. on the OT text and the New. Some of the remarks were unclear though over all the book is extremely helpful. I also read
      Message 2 of 14 , Mar 3, 1997
      • 0 Attachment
        I was recently reading Archer and Ch. on the OT text and the New. Some
        of the remarks were unclear though over all the book is extremely
        helpful. I also read a paper on the 19 passages where the NT quotes the
        OT and there is a variant in the New (March 96 SBL in St Louis).
        However, I still have questions on the percentage of times the NT quotes
        or refers to the Heb, LXX, Both, Neither. Can someone help me on this?
        Thanks in advance.


        --
        Prof. Ron Minton: rminton@... W (417)268-6053 H 833-9581
        Baptist Bible Graduate School 628 E. Kearney St. Springfield, MO 65803
      • Matthew Johnson
        On Mon, 3 Mar 1997, Ronald L. Minton wrote: [snip] ... To which I reply: Ron- Very good question. However, this is a little harder to answer than one might
        Message 3 of 14 , Mar 3, 1997
        • 0 Attachment
          On Mon, 3 Mar 1997, Ronald L. Minton wrote:

          [snip]
          > However, I still have questions on the percentage of times the NT quotes
          > or refers to the Heb, LXX, Both, Neither. Can someone help me on this?
          > Thanks in advance.
          >
          To which I reply:

          Ron-

          Very good question. However, this is a little harder to answer than one
          might hope, because over the centuries copyists have tended to harmonize
          the OT citations to the LXX. So to answer it properly, one would have to
          resort to a procedure something like the following:

          1) Look up all NT citations of OT in Nestle-Alans's 26th edition
          2) Look at all the variants listed in the critical apparatus for
          these citations.
          3) Try to guess from the style of the rest of the book in which
          the citation occurs, which, if any, of the variants is likely
          to be the NT author's own translation from the Hebrew.
          4) Submit your gesses to this newsgroup and see which ones still
          stand after we have all had a chance to throw rocks at it.

          Good luck finding an snswer.


          Matthew Johnson
          Waiting for the blessed hope and the appearance of the glory of our
          great God and Saviour Jesus Christ (Ti 2:13).

          >
          > --
          > Prof. Ron Minton: rminton@... W (417)268-6053 H 833-9581
          > Baptist Bible Graduate School 628 E. Kearney St. Springfield, MO 65803
          >
          >
        • Robert B. Waltz
          ... Personally I found A&C rather irritating. They tried to make everything match the MT, and paid no attention to the variants in LXX. I would also observe
          Message 4 of 14 , Mar 4, 1997
          • 0 Attachment
            On Mon, 3 Mar 1997, "Ronald L. Minton" <rminton@...> wrote:

            >I was recently reading Archer and Ch. on the OT text and the New. Some
            >of the remarks were unclear though over all the book is extremely
            >helpful. I also read a paper on the 19 passages where the NT quotes the
            >OT and there is a variant in the New (March 96 SBL in St Louis).
            >However, I still have questions on the percentage of times the NT quotes
            >or refers to the Heb, LXX, Both, Neither. Can someone help me on this?
            >Thanks in advance.

            Personally I found A&C rather irritating. They tried to make everything
            match the MT, and paid no attention to the variants in LXX.

            I would also observe that the Nestle apparatus isn't much help. It
            will sometimes label a citation as being from LXX -- but only where
            the LXX is distinctly different from MT. It would be helpful if it
            noted where the citation matches LXX, not where it differs from MT.

            In my ignorance, I don't know of any particular studies on this
            subject. In my own work, I find that Paul tends to follow LXX.
            I believe this is true with most NT authors (Luke in particular).
            The one major exception is Matthew, who will usually translate
            the OT himself unless the LXX has some particular reading he
            liked (e.g. the citation about the "virgin" bearing a son).

            -*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-

            Robert B. Waltz
            waltzmn@...

            Want more loudmouthed opinions about textual criticism?
            Try my web page: http://www.skypoint.com/~waltzmn
            (A very rough draft of part of the Encyclopedia of NT Textual Criticism)
          • Nichael Lynn Cramer
            ... Although no doubt dated in some of the details, surely a good place to start exploring this question is Swete s _Intro to the OT in Greek_; in particular,
            Message 5 of 14 , Mar 4, 1997
            • 0 Attachment
              At 7:04 PM -0600 3/3/97, Ronald L. Minton wrote:
              >I was recently reading Archer and Ch. on the OT text and the New. Some
              >of the remarks were unclear though over all the book is extremely
              >helpful. I also read a paper on the 19 passages where the NT quotes the
              >OT and there is a variant in the New (March 96 SBL in St Louis).
              >However, I still have questions on the percentage of times the NT quotes
              >or refers to the Heb, LXX, Both, Neither. Can someone help me on this?
              >Thanks in advance.

              Although no doubt dated in some of the details, surely a good place to
              start exploring this question is Swete's _Intro to the OT in Greek_; in
              particular, Chap II of Part 3 titled "Quotations from the LXX in the NT".

              One should turn to Swete for the details but, in short, he argues that
              "...the LXX is the principal source from which the writers of the N.T.
              derive their O.T. quotations." [p392], ranging from Acts where O.T.
              quotations "are taken from the LXX exclusively" [p398] to the Pauline
              corpus in which "more than half" [p400] come from the LXX.

              Nichael
              nichael@... "Did I forget, forget to mention Memphis,
              http://www.sover.net/~nichael/ Home of Elvis and the ancient Greeks..."
            • Mitchell Gray
              Hello, I don t know if this is an appropriate question for the TC list if not, please tell me. Someone once told me that they believe that the writers of the
              Message 6 of 14 , Dec 27, 1999
              • 0 Attachment
                Hello,

                I don't know if this is an appropriate question for the TC list if not,
                please tell me. Someone once told me that they believe that the writers of
                the NT probably used the LXX very little. When I asked him why he said
                that copies of the LXX were expensive and were less accessible than those
                of the Hebrew MSS. He also said that the reason it is difficult to find
                any quote in the NT that resembles that of the LXX is because it is
                possible that the NT writers took their Heb. MSS and made their own
                translation.

                I know very little about the LXX and its relationship to the NT but is this
                a plausible theory? Would it have any support or has it been proven that
                the NT authors used the LXX when writing their letters?

                Any information would be great. Thanks in advance.

                Mitchell

                ---
                You are currently subscribed to tc-list as: listsaver-of-tc-list@...
                To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-tc-list-525M@...-certr.org
              • Robert B. Waltz
                ... This is one of those cases where one is tempted to say, What was your acquaintance smoking at the time ? :-) The majority of NT quotations appear to be
                Message 7 of 14 , Dec 27, 1999
                • 0 Attachment
                  On 12/27/99, Mitchell Gray wrote:

                  >Hello,
                  >
                  >I don't know if this is an appropriate question for the TC list if not,
                  >please tell me. Someone once told me that they believe that the writers of
                  >the NT probably used the LXX very little. When I asked him why he said
                  >that copies of the LXX were expensive and were less accessible than those
                  >of the Hebrew MSS. He also said that the reason it is difficult to find
                  >any quote in the NT that resembles that of the LXX is because it is
                  >possible that the NT writers took their Heb. MSS and made their own
                  >translation.
                  >
                  >I know very little about the LXX and its relationship to the NT but is this
                  >a plausible theory? Would it have any support or has it been proven that
                  >the NT authors used the LXX when writing their letters?

                  This is one of those cases where one is tempted to say, "What was your
                  acquaintance smoking at the time"? :-)

                  The majority of NT quotations appear to be from the LXX. Some, such
                  as Matt. 1:23, *have* to be from LXX, because the MT doesn't mean
                  the same thing as the LXX.

                  Admittedly this reading from Matthew is an exception; Matthew usually
                  translates on his own. But he was unusual in this; almost all of
                  Paul's quotations, for instance, match one or another of the LXX textual
                  strands. (For some reason, NT quotations don't seem to be used much
                  in LXX textual criticism. Somebody should do something about that. :-)
                  Though admittedly it's a complicated problem. :-)

                  The argument about the expense of the manuscripts is, at the least,
                  strange. I would guess that, in Palestine, a manuscript of the Hebrew
                  would be cheaper; lots of people there capable of making one. Or you
                  could get a used one.

                  But elsewhere, the reverse would be true. Oh, an LXX manuscript might
                  take more material (not sure about this; I haven't seen any comparisons.
                  But LXX has vowels :-). But a Greek could copy an LXX manuscript. And
                  a Greek could *read* an LXX manuscript. In other words, logic says
                  that LXX manuscripts would be more common than Hebrew manuscripts,
                  and hence probably cheaper, outside Palestine. And most of the NT,
                  it is thought, was written outside Palestine. Therefore, if we trust
                  logic at all, LXX manuscripts would have been more accessible.

                  So both the evidence of the NT and the (much weaker) evidence of logic
                  say that most of the OT quotations in the NT are from the LXX. The
                  fact is, they *are*. For whatever reason. (It may be just that the
                  authors felt they had to quote LXX, as that version would be familiar
                  to their readers. It doesn't really matter....)

                  -*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-

                  Robert B. Waltz
                  waltzmn@...

                  Want more loudmouthed opinions about textual criticism?
                  Try my web page: http://www.skypoint.com/~waltzmn
                  (A site inspired by the Encyclopedia of NT Textual Criticism)

                  ---
                  You are currently subscribed to tc-list as: listsaver-of-tc-list@...
                  To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-tc-list-525M@...-certr.org
                • Steve Puluka
                  ... I would love to see the historical documentation to support this theory! ;-) Joel Kalvesmaki has posted a lot of resources for Septuagint studies on his
                  Message 8 of 14 , Dec 28, 1999
                  • 0 Attachment
                    >From: "Mitchell Gray" <kingmnky@...>

                    >Someone once told me that they believe that the writers of
                    >the NT probably used the LXX very little. When I asked him why he said
                    >that copies of the LXX were expensive and were less accessible
                    >than those of the Hebrew MSS. He also said that the reason it is difficult
                    >to find any quote in the NT that resembles that of the LXX is because it is
                    >possible that the NT writers took their Heb. MSS and made their own
                    >translation.

                    I would love to see the historical documentation to support this theory! ;-)

                    Joel Kalvesmaki has posted a lot of resources for Septuagint studies on his
                    web site. The link below is a chart listing the quotations of scripture in
                    the New Testament with the Septuagint and MT translations of each. You can
                    see for yourself and judge for yourself the authors source. His main web
                    page also links out to an extensive bibliography of books and periodicals
                    where you can read what scholars have to say on this issue.

                    http://arts-sciences.cua.edu/ecs/jdk/LXX/NTChart.htm

                    Steve Puluka
                    Adult Education Instructor
                    Byzantine Catholic Archeparchy of Pittsburgh
                    http://arrive.at/byzantinecatholic

                    ______________________________________________________
                    Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com


                    ---
                    You are currently subscribed to tc-list as: listsaver-of-tc-list@...
                    To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-tc-list-525M@...-certr.org
                  • Gregory J. Woodhouse
                    Very interesting. Wht can be said about similarities between NT mss. (which?) and LXX mss. here? ... Gregory Woodhouse gjw@wnetc.com /
                    Message 9 of 14 , Dec 28, 1999
                    • 0 Attachment
                      Very interesting. Wht can be said about similarities between NT
                      mss. (which?) and LXX mss. here?

                      ---
                      Gregory Woodhouse
                      gjw@... / http://www.wnetc.com/home.html
                      "An atheist staring from his attic window is often nearer to God than the
                      believer caught up in his own false image of God."
                      --Martin Buber


                      ---
                      You are currently subscribed to tc-list as: listsaver-of-tc-list@...
                      To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-tc-list-525M@...-certr.org
                    • Robert B. Waltz
                      ... It s very hard, based on what I ve seen, to correlate NT text-types with LXX readings. However, I ve read -- and what I ve seen in Paul seems to support
                      Message 10 of 14 , Dec 28, 1999
                      • 0 Attachment
                        On 12/28/99, Gregory J. Woodhouse wrote:

                        >Very interesting. Wht can be said about similarities between NT
                        >mss. (which?) and LXX mss. here?

                        It's very hard, based on what I've seen, to correlate NT text-types
                        with LXX readings.

                        However, I've read -- and what I've seen in Paul seems to support
                        this -- that the NT more often quotes the readings of the A text
                        of LXX than the B text. (This is based just on Rahlfs, I'm afraid.)
                        That is, the LXX text circulating in NT times seems not to be the
                        "Old Greek" as originally translated, but rather the somewhat
                        revised later versions.

                        Come to think of it, this *might* have been what the original
                        poster's source's original source said. Not that the NT quotes
                        the Hebrew, but that the NT quotes the LXX texts which have been
                        revised based on the Hebrew.

                        -*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-

                        Robert B. Waltz
                        waltzmn@...

                        Want more loudmouthed opinions about textual criticism?
                        Try my web page: http://www.skypoint.com/~waltzmn
                        (A site inspired by the Encyclopedia of NT Textual Criticism)

                        ---
                        You are currently subscribed to tc-list as: listsaver-of-tc-list@...
                        To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-tc-list-525M@...-certr.org
                      • rlmullen@netpath.net
                        For the Pauline Epistles, see Christopher D. Stanley, PAUL AND THE LANGUAGE OF SCRIPTURE, SNTS Mongraph Series 74, (Cambridge, 1992). --Rod Mullen ...
                        Message 11 of 14 , Dec 28, 1999
                        • 0 Attachment
                          For the Pauline Epistles, see Christopher D. Stanley, PAUL AND THE LANGUAGE
                          OF SCRIPTURE, SNTS Mongraph Series 74, (Cambridge, 1992).

                          --Rod Mullen

                          At 03:51 PM 12/28/99 -0600, you wrote:
                          >On 12/28/99, Gregory J. Woodhouse wrote:
                          >
                          >>Very interesting. Wht can be said about similarities between NT
                          >>mss. (which?) and LXX mss. here?
                          >
                          >It's very hard, based on what I've seen, to correlate NT text-types
                          >with LXX readings.
                          >
                          >However, I've read -- and what I've seen in Paul seems to support
                          >this -- that the NT more often quotes the readings of the A text
                          >of LXX than the B text. (This is based just on Rahlfs, I'm afraid.)
                          >That is, the LXX text circulating in NT times seems not to be the
                          >"Old Greek" as originally translated, but rather the somewhat
                          >revised later versions.
                          >
                          >Come to think of it, this *might* have been what the original
                          >poster's source's original source said. Not that the NT quotes
                          >the Hebrew, but that the NT quotes the LXX texts which have been
                          >revised based on the Hebrew.
                          >
                          >-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-
                          >
                          > Robert B. Waltz
                          > waltzmn@...
                          >
                          >Want more loudmouthed opinions about textual criticism?
                          >Try my web page: http://www.skypoint.com/~waltzmn
                          >(A site inspired by the Encyclopedia of NT Textual Criticism)
                          >
                          >---
                          >You are currently subscribed to tc-list as: rlmullen@...
                          >To unsubscribe send a blank email to
                          leave-tc-list-525M@...-certr.org
                          >


                          ---
                          You are currently subscribed to tc-list as: listsaver-of-tc-list@...
                          To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-tc-list-525M@...-certr.org
                        • U.B.Schmid
                          ... D.-A. Koch, Die Schrift als Zeuge des Evangeliums. Untersuchungen zur Verwendung und zum Verstaendnis der Schrift bei Paulus (BHTh 69), 1986 makes the
                          Message 12 of 14 , Dec 29, 1999
                          • 0 Attachment
                            rlmullen@... wrote:
                            > For the Pauline Epistles, see Christopher D. Stanley, PAUL AND THE LANGUAGE
                            > OF SCRIPTURE, SNTS Mongraph Series 74, (Cambridge, 1992).

                            D.-A. Koch, Die Schrift als Zeuge des Evangeliums. Untersuchungen zur Verwendung
                            und zum Verstaendnis der Schrift bei Paulus (BHTh 69), 1986 makes the point that
                            Pauline texts occasionally give pre-hexaplaric *Textforms*.

                            ------------------------------------------
                            Dr. Ulrich Schmid
                            U.B.Schmid@...


                            ---
                            You are currently subscribed to tc-list as: listsaver-of-tc-list@...
                            To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-tc-list-525M@...-certr.org
                          • Ron Minton
                            Date sent: Tue, 28 Dec 1999 10:07:53 -0800 (PST) From: Gregory J. Woodhouse To: TC-List
                            Message 13 of 14 , Jan 4, 2000
                            • 0 Attachment
                              Date sent: Tue, 28 Dec 1999 10:07:53 -0800 (PST)
                              From: "Gregory J. Woodhouse" <news1!gjw@...>
                              To: "TC-List" <tc-list@...-certr.org>
                              Subject: [tc-list] Re: LXX
                              Very interesting. What can be said about similarities between NT
                              mss. (which?) and LXX mss. here? Gregory Woodhouse
                              gjw@... / http://www.wnetc.com/home.html
                              -------------------------------------
                              A few years ago, I read a paper on this at an SBL Regional
                              meeting in St. Louis (March 23, 1996). There are only 19 places in
                              the UBSGNT/NA/Maj texts where the NT has both an OT quotation
                              and a textual variant in the quoted part. These are a small number,
                              but the Maj. Text tends to quote from Hebrew more and the Cr.
                              Text tends to quote from the LXX more. The Maj. Text deviates
                              from both the Heb and LXX 26%. The Cr. Text does so 74%. I did
                              not feel that there was solid evidence that either had been modified
                              by scribes for the purpose of conforming to a certain OT text. For
                              details, see my SBL paper. The chart below is simplified from the
                              paper; it did not survive the transmission well, but is still useful.
                              Below the Scripture references is found the Maj. then the Cr. For
                              example, in the first entry, the Maj. follows the LXX and the Cr.
                              follows the Hebrew. My comments then follow.

                              NT TEXTUAL FAMILY VARIANTS
                              OF OT QUOTATIONS

                              NT/OT PASSAGE

                              BYZANTINE (MAJORITY)

                              ALEXANDRIAN (UBS4/NA27)

                              NOTES AND COMMENTS

                              

                              Mt. 2:18
                              Jer. 31:15

                              LXX

                              Hebrew

                              The Maj. mss. add "lamentation" to follow the LXX.
                              
                              Mk. 10:6-7
                              Gen. 2:24

                              LXX/Heb

                              Deviates 

                              UBS4 {D} text is in brackets, but clearly
                              attested in LXX, Heb, Maj.

                              

                              Mk. 12:36
                              Ps. 110:1

                              LXX/Heb

                              Deviates

                              See Mt. 22:44 - same Cr. deviant; UBS4 does not
                              list a variant.

                              
                              Mk. 15:34
                              Ps. 22:1

                              Hebrew

                              Hebrew

                              Minor variant; both Alex. and Byz. evidence divided.

                              

                              Lk. 4:4
                              Dt. 8:3

                              LXX/Heb

                              Deviates

                              Cr. here omits key phrase from OT & the Maj.

                              

                              Lk. 19:38
                              Ps. 118:26

                              Deviates
                              

                              Deviates
                              

                              Both texts add the word "king" not found in OT.
                              Actual variant is minor.

                              

                              Jn. 12:40
                              Is. 6:10

                              Hebrew

                              Hebrew

                              Minor variants in verb forms; little effect on meaning.

                              

                              Jn. 13:18
                              Ps. 41:9

                              Deviates

                              LXX/Heb

                              Maj. has "bread with me" where OT, Cr. have "my bread."

                              

                              Acts 7:32
                              Ex. 3:4-10

                              LXX/Heb

                              Deviates 

                              Cr. shortens quote by omitting phrase "the God of" twice.

                              

                              Rom. 3:12
                              Ps. 14:1-3
                              Ps. 53:1-3

                              LXX/Heb

                              Deviates 

                              UBS4 {C} text is in brackets, but clearly
                              attested reading. Slight deviation from OT.

                              

                              Rom. 9:28
                              Is. 10:22-3
                              Hos. 1:10

                              LXX

                              Deviates

                              Cr. omits LXX phrase "cut it short in righteousness."

                              

                              Rom. 10:15
                              Is. 52:7
                              Na. 1:15 

                              LXX/Heb

                              Deviates

                              Cr. omits OT phrase; Maj. shows some division.

                              

                              1 Cor.15:55
                              Hos. 13:14

                              Deviates

                              Deviates

                              Both texts differ from OT in verb choice; Cr. "death" for "Hades."

                              

                              Eph. 4:8
                              Ps. 68:18

                              Deviates

                              Deviates

                              Variant is minor. Both texts show intentional deviation by Paul.

                              

                              Heb. 1:8
                              Ps. 45:6-7

                              LXX/Heb

                              LXX/Heb

                              Minor variant
                              

                              

                              19Heb. 1:12
                              Ps.102:25-6

                              LXX

                              Deviates

                              Cr. has "as a garment," not found in OT.11 The New Testament
                              only quotes the last portion of thi the first part of the LXX which is
                              not being quoted (or, perhaps, reverts to the Hebrew word order)
                              
                              Heb.
                              2:7 Ps. 8:5-7

                              Deviates

                              Deviates

                              Both texts follow partial quote; part of Maj. has full quote.

                              

                              Heb. 8:11
                              Jer.31:31-4

                              LXX/Heb

                              Deviates

                              Cr. omits "of them" found in OT & Maj.

                              

                              Heb. 10:38
                              Hab. 2:3-4

                              LXX

                              Deviates

                              Cr. adds "my" not found in OT or Maj.; otherwise, LXX
                              

                              one miserable scribbler,
                              Ron Minton

                              ---
                              You are currently subscribed to tc-list as: listsaver-of-tc-list@...
                              To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-tc-list-525M@...-certr.org
                            Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.