Biblical Hebrew Forum

["Charles David Isbell" <cisbell AT home.com>]

Thanks Peter,

I will defer to you on all matters pertaining to the interpretation of the
NT.   However, please note that I made exactly the same distinction between
the TEXT of the LXX and the NT and the "Christian exegetical choice" about
it.

That being said, I think it critical to note that neither in the LXX nor in
any of the NT appropriations of Isa 40:3 is there anything translating the
Hebrew phrase ba'aravah.  That being said, there remains nothing poetic to
balance the en te eremo of the first strophe.  And lacking the conclusive
locating prepositional phrase, ba'aravah, the verse in Greek is laid open to
an alternative interpretation.   I am interested to learn that you believe
the Greek text itself to ambiguous.  This is a new insight to me.

In this vein, may I pose two related questions:  [1] does the LXX omission
of ba'aravah betray a non-MT Vorlage?  [2] How is the interpretation of this
verse any different, or even noteworthy, from the common use of the LXX by
the NT authors?


Charles