[b-hebrew] All OT Texts from Either LXX or MT?

David P Donnelly davedonnelly1 at juno.com
Wed Apr 27 17:25:40 EDT 2011

Will Parsons wbparsons at alum.mit.edu 
Wed Apr 27 16:19:58 EDT 2011 
Previous message: [b-hebrew] All OT Texts from Either LXX or MT? 
Next message: [b-hebrew] Why not ")ULBAN"? 
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] 

On Wed, 27 Apr 2011 01:24:04 -0700 (PDT), Philip <philipengmann at
yahoo.com> wrote:
> Dear Listees,
> I wish to make a statement that I would need confirmation of--in other
> words, a statement which I am not totally sure of, and it is this:
> All complete Old Testament texts that exist in the world today are
> either from the MT or the LXX.
> Could this be a true statement?

Dave Donnelly comments:

It is my understanding that the Ben Chayim Hebrew text of 1525 A.D. was
basically derived from the Leningrad Codex of  1008-1010 A.D. yet in the
Ben Chayyim Hebrew Text of 1525 A.D. 
6518 occurrences of Hebrew Word # 3068 exist [yod-shewa-heh-defective

It appears to me that the authors involved in creating the Ben Chayyim
Hebrew text just might have been trying to push the translation "Jehovah"
 as an accurate translation of  [yod-shewa-heh-defective
holem-waw-qamets-heh] a.k.a. Strongs Hebrew Word #3068.

Can any one who posts here provide some reason why so many occurrence of
[yod-shewa-heh-defective holem-waw-qamets-heh] occur in the Ben Chayyim
Hebrew text of 1525 :A.D. while possibly less than 500 occurrences of 
[yod-shewa-heh-defective holem-waw-qamets-heh] occurs in the Leningrad

Of course the editors of Codex L. placed 6 different variants of YHWH in
the Leningrad Codex.

Dave Donnelly

Groupon.com Official Site
1 huge daily deal on the best stuff to do in your city. Try it today!

More information about the b-hebrew mailing list