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

Re: Question regarding Kurios in the LXX/NT

Expand Messages
  • 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 1 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 2 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 3 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 4 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 5 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.