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

Proverbs 23:29 parallelling Gen 49:12, eyes of glass- and Eye of Falcon Horus

Expand Messages
  • pasi pohjala
    Dear Readers of Bible, the blessing of Judah in Gen 49:12 includes the notice of his eyes as HKLJLJ YNJJM MJJN, presenting this rare word HKLJLJ whose best
    Message 1 of 3 , May 11, 2007
    • 0 Attachment
      Dear Readers of Bible,
       
      the blessing of Judah in Gen 49:12 includes the notice of his eyes as HKLJLJ YNJJM MJJN, presenting this rare word HKLJLJ whose best parallel in Masoretic text (even Qumran, seemingly) is the Prov 23:29 where HKLLWT is ascribed to eyes. But, in the LXX rendering this Prov 23:29 writes of PELEIOI OI OFTALMOI, presenting the eyes as doves or pigeons. Actually, thus, in the LXX this becomes connected with the Prov 23 and 30 writing something of Falcon or eagle (MT: NSR) that in Prov 23 and 30 describes the good seeing of eyes. Interestingly, the Alexandrian/Hellenistic translators probably had heard of Eye of the Falcon Horus, in Egyptian mythology denoting polished magnifying stone! And Targumim PsJonatan and Neophyti in Gen 49:12 render that Judah had beautiful/bright eyes of glass! Have some of the Readers possibly thought of such, difficult to find in present Books.
       
      Best Wishes, Pasi K Pohjala London


      Jetzt Mails schnell in einem Vorschaufenster überfliegen. Dies und viel mehr bietet das neue Yahoo! Mail .
    • Philip
      Dear TC list-members, 1. In biblical translation, NT quotations are indirectly taken from the LXX, whereas OT quotations are generally taken from MT leading to
      Message 2 of 3 , May 11, 2007
      • 0 Attachment
        Dear TC list-members,
         
        1. In biblical translation, NT quotations are indirectly taken from the LXX, whereas OT quotations are generally taken from MT leading to discrepancies between OT & NT quotations, e.g. Ge 47:31 & Heb 11:21; Ps 8.6 & Heb 2.7; Ps 40.7 & Heb 10.5 etc in ASV (American Standard Version) etc.
         
        2. The natural divisions between NT & OT scholarship seem to be partly responsible for this, and perhaps other such variations?
         
        3. I think that there ought to be more (there is already some) "cross-border" studies between OT and NT scholarship; e.g. OT & NT TC etc.
         
        4. Am I on the right track?
         
        Best regards.
         
        Philip Engmann


        No need to miss a message. Get email on-the-go
        with Yahoo! Mail for Mobile. Get started.
      • Greg Crawford
        I don’t know that it is as simple as describing the problem as a division between NT, and Hebrew Bible, scholarship. Emmanuel Tov and others have suggested
        Message 3 of 3 , May 12, 2007
        • 0 Attachment

          I don’t know that it is as simple as describing the problem as a division between NT, and Hebrew Bible, scholarship. Emmanuel Tov and others have suggested that the LXX is an earlier edition of the Hebrew Bible which continued to be copied even after a later proto-Masoretic edition became available. For an abbreviated form of a lecture on this subject, see here: http://www.abmc.org/services_folio.html

          Select Volume 22,  Number 2.

           

          Did the authors of NT publications choose the LXX because they preferred the theology of the LXX, or was it simply because it was already translated into Koiné Greek, the then universal language of the Roman Empire ? Were NT characters able to choose, in the way we do, between manuscript traditions, or did their lack of access to manuscripts means that they quoted from an oral tradition in which the manuscript traditions were confused?

           

          Greg

           


          From: textualcriticism@yahoogroups.com [mailto: textualcriticism@yahoogroups.com ] On Behalf Of Philip
          Sent: Saturday, 12 May 2007 6:54 AM
          To: textualcriticism@yahoogroups.com
          Subject: [textualcriticism] More "Cross-Border" OT/NT TC etc?

           

          Dear TC list-members,

           

          1. In biblical translation, NT quotations are indirectly taken from the LXX, whereas OT quotations are generally taken from MT leading to discrepancies between OT & NT quotations, e.g. Ge 47:31 & Heb 11:21; Ps 8.6 & Heb 2.7; Ps 40.7 & Heb 10.5 etc in ASV (American Standard Version) etc.

           

          2. The natural divisions between NT & OT scholarship seem to be partly responsible for this, and perhaps other such variations?

           

          3. I think that there ought to be more (there is already some) "cross-border" studies between OT and NT scholarship; e.g. OT & NT TC etc.

           

          4. Am I on the right track?

           

          Best regards.

           

          Philip Engmann

           


          No need to miss a message. Get email on-the-go
          with Yahoo! Mail for Mobile . Get started.

        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.