[b-hebrew] Is the Massoretic text reliable?

James Christian jc.bhebrew at googlemail.com
Sun Nov 22 09:15:21 EST 2009


Off list I was given this link:

http://www.sas.upenn.edu/religious_studies/rak/earlypap.html

<http://www.sas.upenn.edu/religious_studies/rak/earlypap.html>which in turn
links to this fragment among others:

http://ccat.sas.upenn.edu/rak//lxxmprssm.jpg

<http://ccat.sas.upenn.edu/rak//lxxmprssm.jpg>As can be seen the
tetragrammaton is inline with the Greek text in paleo-Hebrew characters.

James Christian

2009/11/20 James Christian <jc.bhebrew at googlemail.com>

> Offlist I was asked:
>
> wasn't the Septuagint written with LORD where the yhwh was
>
> Onlist, for the benefit of those who also may have this same
> misunderstanding and while preserving the anonymity of the original
> enquirere, I reply:
>
> No! The oldest fragments of the LXX show that the tetragammaton was
> preserved. Does anybody have a link to photographs of the relevant
> fragments?
>
> James Christian
>
> 2009/11/20 Petr Tomasek <tomasek at etf.cuni.cz>
>
> On Thu, Nov 19, 2009 at 07:23:42AM -0800, K Randolph wrote:
>> > James:
>> >
>> > I would like to see the details before making a decision. The first one
>> > sounds plausible. Is there any evidence from other MSS to back it up?
>> > Anything from the DSS?
>> >
>> > As for the anthropomorphisms of God, I don’t know of anyone who
>> considered
>> > them to be a description of physical attributes. Therefore they didn’t
>> cause
>> > a problem.
>>
>> You are very wrong! The anthropomorphisms posed a big problem for the
>> translators
>> of the Septuagint and to yet larger extent to the translators of the
>> Targum
>> Onkelos where such a biblical passages are transleted consistently in a
>> way
>> to avoid them (e.g. replacing "God" with "God's glory", "God's presence",
>> "God's word", etc.).
>>
>> > Karl W. Randolph.
>> >
>> > On Thu, Nov 19, 2009 at 2:07 AM, James Christian
>> > <jc.bhebrew at googlemail.com>wrote:
>> >
>> > > In such cases of this type I would be suspicious of the change. The
>> basis
>> > > of the change is that it conflicts with their theology and should
>> probably
>> > > be better viewed as a corruption rather than a correction. If some
>> were to
>> > > get their way they would alter verses referring to God's 'hands',
>> 'feet' etc
>> > > as it conflicts with their idea of God. Obviously, God doesn't have
>> physical
>> > > hands and feet as we think of them and it is unlikely that the
>> original
>> > > authors believed he did but yet didn't have a theological problem with
>> > > referring to them.
>> > >
>> > > James Christian
>> > >
>> > > 2009/11/17 K Randolph <kwrandolph at gmail.com>
>> > >
>> > >> Thanks, Petr:
>> > >>
>> > >> It is my understanding that these are textual witnesses.
>> > >>
>> > >> I did see a discussion of the first one, Genesis 18:22, where the
>> change
>> > >> was
>> > >> noted and why: the original had the Lord standing before Abraham. But
>> the
>> > >> Masoretes concluded that the inferior stands before the superior,
>> that
>> > >> it’s
>> > >> not merely a spacial statement, therefore they changed the verse to
>> say
>> > >> that
>> > >> Abraham stood before the Lord. But I don’t have any information about
>> the
>> > >> other passages.
>> > >>
>> > >> Karl W. Randolph.
>> > >>
>> > >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > b-hebrew mailing list
>> > b-hebrew at lists.ibiblio.org
>> > http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew
>>
>> --
>> Petr Tomasek <http://www.etf.cuni.cz/~tomasek>
>> Jabber: butrus at jabbim.cz
>> SIP: butrus at ekiga.net
>> _______________________________________________
>> b-hebrew mailing list
>> b-hebrew at lists.ibiblio.org
>> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew
>>
>
>



More information about the b-hebrew mailing list