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

Re: LXX

Expand Messages
  • 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 1 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 2 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 3 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 4 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 5 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 6 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 7 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 8 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 9 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 10 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 11 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.