Biblical Hebrew Forum

["Doug Belot" <dbelot AT bigpond.net.au>]

This is an interesting admission , if this is so , that the NT was 
originally in Greek , and we know that the tetragrammaton was considered by 
Jesus and Luke and Paul to be best written as Kupiou , why do you think 
later scholars prempted those obviously better scholars than any of us by 
ignoring the teaching of Jesus and Paul and bringing in confusion such as 
YHWH , if Jesus was writing Kupioz , and Paul was writing Kupioz , why dont 
we all follow their pattern.

Do we think we know more than they.

doug belot


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Yigal Levin" <leviny1 AT mail.biu.ac.il>
To: <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>
Sent: Sunday, October 17, 2010 5:47 AM
Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] the hellenization of isaiah


> Dear Fred,
>
> In short, yes. The vast majority of scholars believe that most, if not 
> all,
> of the NT was originally written in Greek, within a Greek-speaking Jewish
> and non-Jewish milieu. But even if parts were written in either Hebrew or
> Aramaic, the original texts have been lost. Since the best we have in hand
> is translations from the Greek into Hebrew or Aramaic, all we would be 
> able
> to discuss is why the translators used this word or another.
>
>
> Yigal Levin
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: b-hebrew-bounces AT lists.ibiblio.org
> [mailto:b-hebrew-bounces AT lists.ibiblio.org] On Behalf Of fred burlingame
> Sent: Saturday, October 16, 2010 5:47 PM
> To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
> Subject: [b-hebrew] the hellenization of isaiah
>
> Isaiah 61:1 appears in classical hebrew format.
>
> A. An introductory clause: "spirit of Lord of me on me because:"
>
> B. followed by a couplet in parallel: (i) "He annoints me to bear tidings 
> to
> afflicted ones; and (ii) He sends me to bind up ones being broken of 
> heart;"
>
> C. followed by a couplet in parallel: (i) "to proclaim to ones being
> captive, liberty; and (ii) to ones being bound, opening."
>
> The subsequent, septuagint, greek, translation, in its wisdom, alters the
> original hebrew and changes clause "C(ii)" to: "to the blind, recovery of
> sight."
>
> The subsequent, greek, translation of the original hebrew new testament in
> luke 4:18 then proceeds to further change the hebrew by: (1.) retaining 
> the
> septuagint old testament, new clause "C(ii);" (2.) deleting clause 
> "B(ii);"
> and adding another new clause "C(iii):" "to send to ones being oppressed a
> release."
>
> With the symmetry, balance and substance lost in and by the hellenization 
> of
> the hebrew new testament, a question arises. Why is the hebrew new 
> testament
> discussed not here? Does the opinion continue to hold sway that the new
> testament orginally authored in greek?
>
> regards,
>
> fred burlingame
> _______________________________________________
> b-hebrew mailing list
> b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew
>
> _______________________________________________
> b-hebrew mailing list
> b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 9.0.862 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/3199 - Release Date: 10/16/10 
04:34:00