[b-hebrew] elohim versus aggelous, Psalm 8:6[5] MT verses LXX

Jason Hare jason at hareplay.com
Sat Sep 27 14:46:00 EDT 2003


> Aggeloi is not a typical gloss for )lhyM in the LXX. Here is some data to
> work with.
>
>
> Psalms 8:6
> m )lhyMpar aggelous
>
> Psalms 97:7
> )lhyM     hoi aggeloi autou [96.7]
>
> Psalms 138:1
> )lhyM     aggelon [137.1]
>
> DanielLXX 2:11
> )lhyN     aggelos
>
> Job 20:15
> )l aggelos

Clay,

Do you think it possible that only single words from these lines were
changed from each of these books--Daniel, Job, and Psalms?

Would there be completely different Vorlages for each of these books (since
they were *not* contained as a single unit) in which one followed what we
ended up with in the MT [elohim] and the other what we find in the LXX
[angeloi]? I think it is a bit of a stretch to try to say that these were
*most likely* from a different Vorlage.

I think, rather, that all of these occurrences of [elohim]/[el] >
[angeloi]/[angelos] should render a conclusion in our mind that the idea
that we have of angels (heavenly beings under the authority/control of the
Supreme) was within the semantic domain of [el]/[elohim] in the minds of the
ancient Israelites. Is this out of the way?

It would seem to me, by these several occurrences, that (given certain
contexts) [angeloi] is not an *atypical* gloss for [elohim].

Sorry if I ramble a bit. Also, sorry for not using the transliteration
scheme. I just get annoyed at so many parentheses that represent letters. I
have placed my transcription in brackets to represent a type of sound-based
spelling. ;-)

[elohim] > )LHYM
[el] > )L
[angelos] > AGGELOS
[angeloi] > AGGELOI

Best regards,
Jason Hare




More information about the b-hebrew mailing list