acrane at harvestwest.wa.edu.au
Sun Jan 28 03:38:00 EST 2001
This same principle can be applied to Ezekiel - that whilst not as severe as
Isaiah, yet has numerous times where the translator misread the Hebrew.....
(I am currently comparing the LXX and MT of Ezekiel).
> From: "Dan Wagner" <Dan.Wagner at datastream.net>
> >and the LXX translator[s] of Isaiah were rather
> > in there knowledge of Hebrew as compared to some
> other portions of the LXX
> It would be nice to be able to think so, but only a
> person who has never compared the LXX closely with the
> Hebrew could say so. The translation of Isaiah is one
> of the worst in the LXX, at best a rough equivalent,
> but often struggling to make sense of the original at
> all. The translator(s) of Isaiah certainly seem to
> have known their Greek better than their Hebrew.
> It is not easy to recognise -
> "For a child is born to us, and a son is given to us,
> whose government is upon his shoulder: and his name is
> called the Messenger of great counsel: for I will
> bring peace upon the princes, and health to him."
> (Isaiah 9.6)
> Or who would recognise
> "Woe unto him that striveth with his Maker! a potsherd
> among the potsherds of the earth! Shall the clay say
> to him that fashioneth it, What makest thou? or thy
> work, He hath no hands?"
> "What excellent thing have I prepared as clay of the
> potter? Will the ploughman plough the earth all day?
> shall the clay say to the potter, What art thou doing
> that thou dost not work, nor hast hands? (Isaiah
> These are taken almost at random. It is sufficient to
> go through any chapter carefully comparing the two
> texts to see that the LXX translator of Isaiah was
> quite out of his depth.
> Jan Britten
More information about the b-hebrew