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

Question regarding Kurios in the LXX/NT

Expand Messages
  • biblical_studies@juno.com
    Dear List members, On another list of which I am a member, another member posted this statement: What we know is that NT manuscripts and LXX manuscripts from
    Message 1 of 8 , Jun 4, 2005
    • 0 Attachment
      Dear List members,

      On another list of which I am a member, another member posted this statement:

      "What we know is that NT manuscripts and LXX manuscripts from the second century CE contain the abbreviation KS (for KURIOS) where the tetragrammaton is expected. Further do we know that LXX manuscripts up to the middle of the first century CE contained the name (YHWH in Aramaic or Old Hebrew letters or IAW). This shows that between 50 and 150 CE, the text of the LXX was changed as far as the name of God is concerned. YHWH was removed and KS was written instead. I am not aware of any scholar who has the view that KS in NT manuscripts was written in the autographs, but such nomina sacra (there are several more abbreviations of the same kind) is a phenomenon of the second century CE. Thus, the NT text must have been changed between 50 and 150 as well."

      This is new information to me, and I would appreciate your assessment of the claims being asserted, particularly:

      1) The evidence available that the LXX replaced YHWH for "Kurios" in the late 1st/early 2nd century, and if so the reasoning behind this; and

      2) The claim that YHWH was in the original NT autographs and supplanted with Kurios, along with the claim that few, if any, scholars believe that Kurios is an original reading in the pertinent passages.

      Any insights or direction to online resources available concerning this subject would be greatly appreciated.

      Cordially yours,
      Chuck Wynn
      Campus Staff,
      Riverview Church
    • Wieland Willker
      ... I am no expert on this, but I understand that it is basically assumed that LXX with the tetragrammaton are considered Jewish and those with KurioS are
      Message 2 of 8 , Jun 5, 2005
      • 0 Attachment
        > 1) The evidence available that the LXX replaced
        > YHWH for "Kurios" in the late 1st/early 2nd century,
        > and if so the reasoning behind this;


        I am no expert on this, but I understand that it is basically assumed
        that LXX with the tetragrammaton are considered Jewish and those with
        KurioS are considered Christian. There is some transition and one finds
        e.g. LXX with the tetragrammaton and QeoS as abbreviation in one
        document.


        > 2) The claim that YHWH was in the original NT
        > autographs and supplanted with Kurios, along with
        > the claim that few, if any, scholars believe that
        > Kurios is an original reading in the pertinent
        > passages.


        There is zero evidence that the tetragrammaton was in the autographs of
        course. There is no Christian document with it at all.
        It is in my view quite possible that even the autographs contained some
        forms of nomina sacra. At the earliest times the nomina sacra showed
        much variation (experimentation?) as is evident from the papyri.
        To the 2nd point: You will certainly find no scholar that claims that
        Kurios is NOT an original reading in the NT.
        Again I am no expert. Robert Kraft knows quite a lot about this.

        PS: Please do not post material from one list to another.

        Best wishes
        Wieland
        <><
        ------------------------
        Wieland Willker, Bremen, Germany
        mailto:willker@...-bremen.de
        http://www.uni-bremen.de/~wie/
        Textcritical commentary:
        http://www.uni-bremen.de/~wie/TCG/index.html
      • Jovial
        Actually, there IS evidence that the Divine Name was in Christian versions of the LXX. Jerome talked about how people would mispronounce YHWH, spelled in
        Message 3 of 8 , Jun 5, 2005
        • 0 Attachment
          Actually, there IS evidence that the Divine Name was in Christian versions of the LXX.  Jerome talked about how people would mispronounce YHWH, spelled in Hebrew letters,  as "PIPI" when they saw it in the Greek text and that this is why it was changed to Kurios at later times.
           
          Joe
          ----- Original Message -----
          Sent: Sunday, June 05, 2005 10:16 AM
          Subject: RE: [textualcriticism] Question regarding Kurios in the LXX/NT

          > 1) The evidence available that the LXX replaced
          > YHWH for "Kurios" in the late 1st/early 2nd century,
          > and if so the reasoning behind this;


          I am no expert on this, but I understand that it is basically assumed
          that LXX with the tetragrammaton are considered Jewish and those with
          KurioS are considered Christian. There is some transition and one finds
          e.g. LXX with the tetragrammaton and QeoS as abbreviation in one
          document.


          > 2) The claim that YHWH was in the original NT
          > autographs and supplanted with Kurios, along with
          > the claim that few, if any, scholars believe that
          > Kurios is an original reading in the pertinent
          > passages.


          There is zero evidence that the tetragrammaton was in the autographs of
          course. There is no Christian document with it at all.
          It is in my view quite possible that even the autographs contained some
          forms of nomina sacra. At the earliest times the nomina sacra showed
          much variation (experimentation?) as is evident from the papyri.
          To the 2nd point: You will certainly find no scholar that claims that
          Kurios is NOT an original reading in the NT.
          Again I am no expert. Robert Kraft knows quite a lot about this.

          PS: Please do not post material from one list to another.

          Best wishes
              Wieland
                <><
          ------------------------
          Wieland Willker, Bremen, Germany
          mailto:willker@...-bremen.de
          http://www.uni-bremen.de/~wie/
          Textcritical commentary:
          http://www.uni-bremen.de/~wie/TCG/index.html



        • Frederick
          ... the late 1st/early 2nd century, and if so the reasoning behind this; and There are a handful of BC LXX fragments that have YHWH in various different forms
          Message 4 of 8 , Jun 5, 2005
          • 0 Attachment
            > 1) The evidence available that the LXX replaced YHWH for "Kurios" in
            the late 1st/early 2nd century, and if so the reasoning behind this;
            and

            There are a handful of BC LXX fragments that have YHWH in various
            different forms - Hebrew characters, Greek transliteration, "PIPI"
            which in Greek letters looks a bit like Hebrew YHWH.

            Given the small amount of evidence, it's hard to say whether this
            practice primarily came from particular religious sects, or arose from
            a geographic region, or if indeed it was the original text of the LXX.

            Those who favour the YHWH theory, point to the fact that all the old
            fragments contain a form of YHWH, so the better assumption is that
            YHWH is original. Those who favour Kurios point out that the fragments
            are too small in number and source to be significant, and the complete
            absence of them in the Christian era, and the complete lack of any NT
            usage of YHWH means that we should assume that the YHWH documents are
            an abberation from particular sects or regions.


            > 2) The claim that YHWH was in the original NT autographs and
            >supplanted with Kurios, along with the claim that few, if any,
            >scholars believe that Kurios is an original reading in the pertinent
            >passages.

            There is no evidence that the NT ever contained YHWH, and I don't
            think those claims are credible. Those who claim it would argue that
            YHWH was original in the LXX and since the LXX no longer contains it,
            people must have been active in changing this aspect. In my opinion,
            IF YHWH was original in the LXX, then it had already mostly
            disappeared from the main textual stream before the Christian era.
          • Frederick
            ... versions of the LXX. Jerome talked about how people would mispronounce YHWH, spelled in Hebrew letters, as PIPI when they saw it in the Greek text and
            Message 5 of 8 , Jun 5, 2005
            • 0 Attachment
              --- In textualcriticism@yahoogroups.com, "Jovial" <jovial@c...> wrote:
              > Actually, there IS evidence that the Divine Name was in Christian
              versions of the LXX. Jerome talked about how people would
              mispronounce YHWH, spelled in Hebrew letters, as "PIPI" when they saw
              it in the Greek text and that this is why it was changed to Kurios at
              later times.


              Jerome said that he found the name in "certain Greek volumes". He
              doesn't say that they are Christian volumes, and he certainly doesn't
              say they are found in many or the majority of Christian volumes.
            • K. Martin Heide
              biblical_studies@juno.com wrote: Dear List members, On another list of which I am a member, another member posted this statement: What we know is that NT
              Message 6 of 8 , Jun 6, 2005
              • 0 Attachment
                biblical_studies@... wrote:
                Dear List members,
                
                On another list of which I am a member, another member posted this statement:
                
                "What we know is that NT manuscripts and LXX manuscripts from the second century CE contain the abbreviation KS (for KURIOS) where the tetragrammaton is expected. Further do we know that LXX manuscripts up to the middle of the first century CE contained  the name (YHWH in Aramaic or Old Hebrew letters or IAW).  This shows that between 50 and 150 CE, the text of the LXX was changed as far as the name of God is concerned.  YHWH was removed and KS was written instead. I am not aware of any scholar who has the view that KS in NT manuscripts was written in the autographs, but such nomina sacra (there are several more abbreviations of the same kind) is a phenomenon of the second century CE. Thus, the NT text must have been changed between 50 and 150 as well."
                
                This is new information to me, and I would appreciate your assessment of the claims being asserted, particularly:
                
                1) The evidence available that the LXX replaced YHWH for "Kurios" in the late 1st/early 2nd century, and if so the reasoning behind this; and 
                
                2) The claim that YHWH was in the original NT autographs and supplanted with Kurios, along with the claim that few, if any, scholars believe that Kurios is an original reading in the pertinent passages.
                
                Any insights or direction to online resources available concerning this subject would be greatly appreciated.
                
                Cordially yours,
                Chuck Wynn
                Campus Staff,
                Riverview Church
                  

                Dear Chuck,

                as far as I know, Pietersma's studies has shaken the long hold thesis, that pre-Christian LXX-mss never would utilize KURIOS:

                - KURIOS was already in use in the pre-Christian era; the use of PIPI, IAW, YHWH etc. in LXX-uncials
                is a later development within the LXX text history.
                See Pietersma, A.: "Kyrios or Tetragram: A Renewed Quest for the Original LXX" in: Pietersma / Cox, De Septuaginta: Studies in Honour of John William Wevers ..., Mississauga 1984.
                and:
                Wevers, John W.: "The Rendering of the Tetragram in the Psalter and Pentateuch: A Comparative Study" in: JSNTS 332 (2001), pp. 21-35.

                - LXX-Mss written by Christians are distinguised from their Jewish counterparts by the use of the nomina sacra;
                see for that: Hengel, Martin: The Septuagint as Christian Scripture, Edinburgh 2002, pp. 41-43; see also Aland, K.: Repertorium der griechischen christlichen Papyri I, p. 3ff. Already in the first / second century, there are some
                LXX-mss evidently used by Christians, using KS  or QS to abbreviate, as is common in NT-mss.


                Martin

              • biblical_studies@juno.com
                Thank you for your replies and information--they reaffirmed what I thought, but I wanted to be sure. My apologies for posting material from another group list.
                Message 7 of 8 , Jun 6, 2005
                • 0 Attachment
                  Thank you for your replies and information--they reaffirmed what I thought, but I wanted to be sure.

                  My apologies for posting material from another group list. The intent was to honor the author by fairly representing his point of view, but I shall be careful to do that in other ways in the future.

                  Cordially yours,
                  Chuck Wynn
                  Campus Staff,
                  Riverview Church
                • J. Ted Blakley
                  Chuck, You have already received a number of informative responses; mine is simply one of clarification regarding what the member you cited claims. In the last
                  Message 8 of 8 , Jun 7, 2005
                  • 0 Attachment
                    Chuck,
                        You have already received a number of informative responses; mine is simply one of clarification regarding what the member you cited claims. In the last half of your point 2 you ask listers to assess "the claim that few, if any, scholars believe that Kurios is an original reading in the pertinent passages."
                        I am assuming that this refers to the member's statement, "I am not aware of any scholar who has the view that KS in NT manuscripts was written in the autographs, but such nomina sacra (there are several more abbreviations of the same kind) is a phenomenon of the second century CE."
                        What seems to be claimed here has to do with the nomina sacra, KS, and not with the word Kurios.
                     
                    Sincerely,
                    Ted
                     
                    =================================================
                    J. Ted Blakley
                     
                    Ph.D. Candidate • The Gospel of Mark
                    University of St Andrews, Scotland
                     
                    jtb1@...
                    =================================================
                  Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.