[b-hebrew] Septuagint vs Hebrew, effect on Christianity
schmuel at nyc.rr.com
Mon Oct 16 09:10:50 EDT 2006
>>>> An easier general explanation for the verses in question -
>>>> The Greek OT was 'smoothed' by low-quality scribes between 100 AD to 500 AD
>>>> to be closer to the NT - by scribes who simply could not leave midrash alone :-)
>>> HH: Where did you get this information?
>> One good book is by Floyd Nolen Jones.
>> http://www.floydjones.org/LXX.pdf The Septuagint: A Critical Analysis
>HH: This does not look like a good piece of writing, as reviewed here: http://ecclesia.org/truth/defense.html
Harold, that is not a "review", not even close.
Do you just cruise for a link and not even check it out carefully ?
It barely qualifies for a hatchet-rant by Richard Anthony.
He throws out all sorts of transparently false accusations of lying.
He is upset that in an excellent article Floyd Jones actually explains
the history of the Greek OT.
One person even bothered responding to some of the nonsense in your 'review'
(liar, liar, pants on fire) so I will not reinvent the wheel. This stuff is so trivial,
I will give you a section here.
"The only thing wrong with it is that Floyd is lying as to what the Brenton's edition of the Septuagint states!"
Where does Jones state that he is using the Brenton Edition?
The words "Brenton Edition" do not appear in the "Critical Analysis."
"Therefore, Floyd's claim that the Septuagint records Methuselah being 955 is a blatant lie!"
Jones did not say that the Septuagint records Methuselah as being 955.
He even stated that the Septuagint stated that Methuselah was 969 year of age at his death.
"Since he lived to be 969 (the life span given in both (Hebrew and Septuagint)),
the LXX becomes entangled in the absurdity of making Methuselah survive the Flood by 14 years!"
He said that in the majority of the version of the Septuagint is states that Methuselah was 167 and said that Lemach was 188 when Noah was born and Noah was six hundred at the time of the flood. Do the math. 167+188+600=955
The whole Richard Anthony article is on that level, and you throw it in here as a reference ?
Even with all the false accusations of lying ?
>>> You don't include other sources of LXX quotations such as Philo and Josephus.
>> You have confused two distinct issues. The
>> 1) question of a vorlage behind the Greek OT and
>> 2) actual verses that are used for NT/Tanach supposed borrowing.
>> Do Philo or Josephus give any support for those actual verses ?
>> I have never seen even one.
You did not answer this question in regard to the NT prophecy verses,
the issue at hand. Harold, do you even understand what we are discussing ?
I have tried hard to separate two related but very distinct issues.
Oh, I see you agree that we have no extant Latin OT manuscripts at all, and little
early Greek OT, just smidgens of attempted reconstructions from this and that.
>Determination of the exact wording of a quotation often must remain problematical
More information about the b-hebrew