Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

b-hebrew - Re: [b-hebrew] Septuagint vs Hebrew, effect on Christianity

b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Biblical Hebrew Forum

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Harold Holmyard <hholmyard AT ont.com>
  • To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
  • Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] Septuagint vs Hebrew, effect on Christianity
  • Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2006 09:45:33 -0500

Schmuel wrote:

One good book is by Floyd Nolen Jones.
http://www.floydjones.org/LXX.pdf The Septuagint: A Critical Analysis

HH: Here is another unreliable statement by Jones:

3. The third witness [to the early existence of the Septuagint] most often referred to is that of the prologue of the Apocryphal non-canonical
book "Jesus, the Son of Sirach." Purportedly written 130 B.C., this work, is often cited as
referring to a Greek version that existed in his day. However, Jesus – "Son of Sirach" – was
merely translating his grandfather's work, and this work was not written in Greek but
Hebrew.4 What he said was "... the same things expressed in Hebrew have not an equal force
when translated into another language. Not only so, but even the Law and the prophecies and
the rest of the books differ not a little as to the things said in them."5

It can be seen that the first statement made no reference whatsoever to the Greek language.
Furthermore, the second statement says nothing about a translation but refers only to what the
Hebrew books said. Jesus, the Son of Sirach, said nothing whatever in the preceding quote about
the Law and the Prophecies existing in a Greek Old Testament. Having undertaken to translate his
grandfather's work from Hebrew to Greek, he was merely speaking of his own difficulties in
translating. Thus Jesus' (the Son of Sirach) citation to the "Law and the Prophecies" had no relation to any Greek Bible.

HH: Despite Mr. Jones' claim, H. St. J. Thackeray, an eminent septuagintalist and Greek scholar, understood well that Sirach here referred to a Greek translation of the Hebrew Bible. And so should any intelligent reader. Here is the excerpt from the Prologue to Sirach:
http://www.hti.umich.edu/cgi/r/rsv/rsv-idx?type=DIV2&byte=3978863

15-26] You are urged therefore to read with good will and attention, and to be indulgent in cases where, despite our diligent labor in translating, we may seem to have rendered some phrases imperfectly. For what was originally expressed in Hebrew does not have exactly the same sense when translated into another language. Not only this work, but even the law itself, the prophecies, and the rest of the books differ not a little as originally expressed.

HH: It seems clear that Ben Sira's grandson excuses the difficulties of his Greek translation of the Hebrew by saying that even the Greek translation of the Hebrew Law, prophets, and other books shows similar differences from the original. The context of his comment is the rendering of Hebrew into Greek

HH: If you wish further notes on this point, see:

http://www.bible-researcher.com/isbelxx01.html#iv

HH: The Prologue to Sirach indicates that much of the Hebrew Bible had been translated into Greek by the time of this writing.

Yours,
Harold Holmyard





Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page