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

CS Bartholomew jacksonpollock at earthlink.net
Sat Sep 27 15:20:31 EDT 2003


On 9/27/03 11:03 AM, "Peter Kirk" <peterkirk at qaya.org> wrote:

> We don't know. But we can make a strong text critical argument, which
> Philip summarised as follows:
> 
>> In view of the word-for-word verbatim presentation of the MT and
>> LXX, it is highly likely that the LXX was translated verbatim from the MT
>> vorlage, i.e. the unpointed MT consonantal text.
>> 

This is not a "strong text critical argument."  "Read any book on textual
criticism" and then go do some textual criticism and you will discover that
single word variants are ubiquitous.

The reason that m )lhyM par aggelous in Psalms 8:6 is probably NOT a textual
variant is theological. What you are calling a "strong text critical
argument" is based on the probability, i.e., that in a string of clean
looking text we will not find an isolated variant. This sort of argument can
be proven wrong by thousands of examples.

However rendering  m )lhyM as par aggelous in Psalms 8:6 makes theological
sense. This is a semantic argument and differs significantly from a
probability argument:

>> In view of the word-for-word verbatim presentation of the MT and
>> LXX, it is highly likely that the LXX was translated verbatim from the MT
>> vorlage, i.e. the unpointed MT consonantal text.






greetings,
Clay Bartholomew 
 





More information about the b-hebrew mailing list