Biblical Hebrew Forum

[Eric Weiss <papaweiss1 AT yahoo.com>]

In its appendix on manuscripts used for both the Hebrew Scriptures (OT) and 
the Greek (NT) Scriptures, a New Testament I was perusing makes the following 
statements:


"The Hebrew version in circulation today, the so-called Massoretic (sic) 
Text, is chiefly a re-translation of the Septuagint into Medieval Hebrew 
that was produced in stages between the 2nd and 9th centuries and upon 
which the Old Testament King James Version is based.... The 
Massoretic (sic) Text is partly a restoration of these six translations 
[i.e., Aquila (A.D. 130), Theodotion (A.D. 180), Symmachus (A.D. 210), 
and the so-called Quinta, Sexta, and Septima (all 3rd century)] as well." 



If I am correctly understanding this, they are saying that the Hebrew 
Masoretic 
text is in large part a re-translation from a Septuagintal/Greek text. How 
valid is 
this claim? It's the first time I've heard/read such a thing. If it's a false 
or 
erroneous claim, where can I find sources/documentation to disprove it?


Eric S. Weiss


                
---------------------------------
Talk is cheap. Use Yahoo! Messenger to make PC-to-Phone calls.  Great rates 
starting at 1¢/min.
>From dwashbur AT nyx.net  Sun Aug 13 14:06:51 2006
Return-Path: <dwashbur AT nyx.net>
X-Original-To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Delivered-To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Received: from MAILPROV.cableone.net (mailprov.cableone.net [24.116.0.207])
        by lists.ibiblio.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D14AD4C00B
        for <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>; Sun, 13 Aug 2006 14:06:51 -0400 
(EDT)
Received: from [192.168.0.103] ([::ffff:24.6.50.91])
        (AUTH: CRAM-MD5 5washburns)
        by MAILPROV.cableone.net with esmtp; Sun, 13 Aug 2006 11:06:50 -0700
        id 000156CA.44DF6A3A.0000185D
From: dwashbur AT nyx.net
To: b-hebrew <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>
Date: Sun, 13 Aug 2006 11:06:47 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <44DF07C7.18309.1B61D03 AT dwashbur.nyx.net>
Priority: normal
In-reply-to: <20060813180334.94017.qmail AT web61025.mail.yahoo.com>
References: <20060813180334.94017.qmail AT web61025.mail.yahoo.com>
X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Windows (4.41)
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Content-description: Mail message body
X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 0632-2, 08/10/2006), Outbound message
X-Antivirus-Status: Clean
Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] Septuagintal influence on Masoretic Hebrew text
X-BeenThere: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.8
Precedence: list
Reply-To: dwashbur AT nyx.net
List-Id: Biblical Hebrew Forum <b-hebrew.lists.ibiblio.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew>,
        <mailto:b-hebrew-request AT lists.ibiblio.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://lists.ibiblio.org/sympa/arc/b-hebrew>
List-Post: <mailto:b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>
List-Help: <mailto:sympa AT lists.ibiblio.org?subject=HELP>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew>,
        <mailto:b-hebrew-request AT lists.ibiblio.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 13 Aug 2006 18:06:52 -0000



On 13 Aug 2006 at 11:03, Eric Weiss wrote:

> In its appendix on manuscripts used for both the Hebrew Scriptures (OT) and 
> the Greek (NT) Scriptures, a New Testament I was perusing makes the 
> following 
> statements:
> 
> 
> "The Hebrew version in circulation today, the so-called Massoretic (sic) 
> Text, is chiefly a re-translation of the Septuagint into Medieval Hebrew 
> that was produced in stages between the 2nd and 9th centuries and upon 
> which the Old Testament King James Version is based.... The 
> Massoretic (sic) Text is partly a restoration of these six translations 
> [i.e., Aquila (A.D. 130), Theodotion (A.D. 180), Symmachus (A.D. 210), 
> and the so-called Quinta, Sexta, and Septima (all 3rd century)] as well." 
> 
> 
> 
> If I am correctly understanding this, they are saying that the Hebrew 
> Masoretic 
> text is in large part a re-translation from a Septuagintal/Greek text. How 
> valid is 
> this claim? It's the first time I've heard/read such a thing. If it's a 
> false or 
> erroneous claim, where can I find sources/documentation to disprove it?

Who published this New Testament you're looking at?  If the MT is a 
translation of the LXX 
it's a lousy one, because the LXX differs frequently from the MT in some 
pretty serious 
ways.  And the language of the MT is definitely NOT Medieval Hebrew.  Sounds 
to me like 
you've got somebody's unsupported propaganda in your hands.

Dave Washburn
Encephaloriasis: That condition generated when the person you are dealing 
with is so 
incredibly stupid, you can actually feel your own brain cells drying up and 
flaking off.