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

Re: LXX

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