Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

b-hebrew - Re: Re[2]: Jewish Revisionism and Attempted Corruptions

b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Biblical Hebrew Forum

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Ian Hutchesson <mc2499 AT mclink.it>
  • To: Biblical Hebrew <b-hebrew AT franklin.oit.unc.edu>
  • Subject: Re: Re[2]: Jewish Revisionism and Attempted Corruptions
  • Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 00:09:37 +0200


At 14.41 26/10/99 -0400, peter_kirk AT sil.org wrote:
>But Moshe's underlying point is surely indisputable.

I was not commenting on Moshe's underlying point in that post. I was
commenting on:

<<The problem with this is that among the Dead Sea Scrolls, which pre-date
Christianity, that plurality of texts are MT and not LXX (which makes up a
very smallamount of texts.)>>

which is not completely true.

>The MT tradition
>is represented in the DSS, very accurately in such cases as the great
>Isaiah scroll which is very close to the consonantal MT.

This surprises me because 1QIs is in Qumran Hebrew. From a quick perusal of
the morphology section of "The Hebrew of the DSS", in a number of places
Qimron cites Kutscher on Isaiah, relating the Isaiah scroll to the late
biblical books and Samaritan pentateuch. It seems therefore unhelpful to
make statements about MT based on 1QIs.

>Therefore the
>consonantal MT cannot be an adaptation or "corruption" made during the
>Christian era in response to Christian interpretation of the LXX
>and/or its Vorlage. It is clear that both the proto-MT and the LXX
>text type were both in existence during and before the first century.
>
>The strongest argument which our friend can make is that later Jews
>preferred the MT tradition because of the Christian use of the LXX.

I don't know what evidence one might produce to make any statements here.
There was no MT at Qumran nor was there anything like a Hebrew text that
would underlie LXX, though I must add there were many more indications
towards what would become MT. There were no standard versions delineated
from my reading.


Cheers,


Ian

>But in practice, as I understand it, there are very few (if any)
>differences between the two Hebrew traditions which reflect doctrinal
>differences between Jews and Christians. Can anyone point me to any
>such examples? Proof texts like Isaiah 7:14 relate only to the Greek
>translations, where Christians preferred the LXX "virgin" (parthenos)
>but Jews preferred "young woman" (neanis) as in other Greek
>translations, but the only attested Hebrew (at least according to BHS)
>is `alma.





Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page