Biblical Hebrew Forum

[Laurent Pinchard <ougaritique AT yahoo.fr>]

in the LXX version of Ex 32,9 (golden calf) the verse is missing whilst the 
MT specifies "wayomer yhwh el mosheh rayty et ha'm hazeh wehineh 
'm-kesheh-oref hou" = and the LORD said unto Moses, I have seen this people, 
and, behold, it is a stiffnecked people. 
 
Does this mean this an addition to the original text or has LXX deliberately 
omitted this verse (if so, why). I am looking for reference 
papers/bibliography on this.
 
thanks

laurent



>From kwrandolph AT gmail.com  Sat Jan 31 10:35:10 2009
Return-Path: <kwrandolph AT gmail.com>
X-Original-To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Delivered-To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Received: by lists.ibiblio.org (Postfix, from userid 3002)
        id BEA814C01D; Sat, 31 Jan 2009 10:35:08 -0500 (EST)
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.2.3 (2007-08-08) on malecky
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.0 required=5.0 tests=HTML_MESSAGE
        autolearn=disabled version=3.2.3
Received: from rv-out-0708.google.com (rv-out-0708.google.com 
[209.85.198.247])
        by lists.ibiblio.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F0ED04C026
        for <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>; Sat, 31 Jan 2009 10:35:06 -0500 
(EST)
Received: by rv-out-0708.google.com with SMTP id k29so898627rvb.30
        for <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>; Sat, 31 Jan 2009 07:35:06 -0800 
(PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.142.238.4 with SMTP id l4mr1011213wfh.98.1233416105529; Sat,
        31 Jan 2009 07:35:05 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <C5AAA677.2292%george.athas AT moore.edu.au>
References: <49845A3A.8070305 AT earthlink.net>
        <C5AAA677.2292%george.athas AT moore.edu.au>
Date: Sat, 31 Jan 2009 07:35:05 -0800
Message-ID: <acd782170901310735r58f5bbeo10aac744caddb0a9 AT mail.gmail.com>
From: K Randolph <kwrandolph AT gmail.com>
To: B-Hebrew <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.9
Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] Sopherim and an 'Established' Text
X-BeenThere: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
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: Sat, 31 Jan 2009 15:35:10 -0000

George:

These are the reasons I asked if the passages with the tiqune sopherim are
found among the DSS. It is possible that the tiqune sopherim date from the
early Talmudic period, after the DSS.

There was a site, but I can't find it now, that listed all the DSS and the
portions of the Bible that are found in them. I used that site to determine
that the DSS could not be used in an earlier discussion, because the passage
in question was missing. Are any of the tiqune sopherim represented among
the DSS, and if so, what do they say?

Karl W. Randolph.

On Sat, Jan 31, 2009 at 6:08 AM, George Athas 
<George.Athas AT moore.edu.au>wrote:

> Harold, there are two major problems I have with this view. Firstly, it is
> based largely on tradition which is fairly late - a good few centuries after
> the period you've mentioned (300-200 BC). Secondly, it doesn't seem to do
> justice to the text critical issues as evidenced by Qumran.
>
> I would argue on the basis of Qumran that there is a proto-Masoretic text
> which is reaching a fairly stable form by the turn of the era. However,
> there are also a plurality of other text types which make it difficult to
> talk about a fixed text.
>
>
> Regards,
>
> GEORGE ATHAS
> Moore Theological College (Sydney, Australia)
> www.moore.edu.au
>