Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

b-hebrew - Re: [b-hebrew] the hellenization of isaiah

b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Biblical Hebrew Forum

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: "Barry H." <nebarry AT verizon.net>
  • To: "fred burlingame" <tensorpath AT gmail.com>, "Yigal Levin" <leviny1 AT mail.biu.ac.il>
  • Cc: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
  • Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] the hellenization of isaiah
  • Date: Sat, 16 Oct 2010 20:46:30 -0400


----- Original Message ----- From: "fred burlingame" <tensorpath AT gmail.com>
To: "Yigal Levin" <leviny1 AT mail.biu.ac.il>
Cc: <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>
Sent: Saturday, October 16, 2010 8:19 PM
Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] the hellenization of isaiah


To sum up: the scholarly community apparently experiences no problem
accepting the conclusion of hebrew language autographs for jerusalem and
juda events preceding and succeeding new testament events. But when it comes
to events occurring between old testament and mishna, the scholarly
community suddenly changes tack, and asserts the greek language as the
source of the new testament autographs.

I am but a humble student of hebrew. Something however, doesn't appear
consistent about such reasoning. The new testament, be it true or false, was
apparently written in, by, for, and about the hebrew inhabitants of
jerusalem and juda; who in turn spoke and wrote hebrew before and after such
new testament events.

The numerosity of greek new testament manuscripts dated some 300 to 1,000
years after the events in question, would appear to imply a conclusion of
greek autograph, no more than the huge number of english language bibles
today imply a conclusion of english language autograph for the new
testament.

Perhaps the time has arrived for hebrew scholars to attempt a hebrew
re-translation of the greek manuscripts? Certainly, many other hebrew
manuscripts available such as evan bohen.

You are making several false assumptions in your question, and I'm not sure if the question is based in a lack of knowledge concerning the relevant issues or due to some religious committment (and you are therefore raising the question in order to debate and defend a position). If the former, any halfway decent historical introduction to the NT will answer your questions. The NT was not written only by and for the "hebrew [sic et passim] inhabitants of jerusalem and judea..." It was written for a missionary church that had spread rapidly throughout the Roman Empire, and whose members nearly universally spoke Greek as a language of communication. This was true even of the church at Rome. You see, the "scholarly community" knows this, and this is why they "suddenly change tack..."

N.E. Barry Hofstetter, semper melius Latine sonat...
Classics and Bible Instructor, TAA
http://www.theamericanacademy.net
(2010 Salvatori Excellence in Education Winner)
V-P of Academic Affairs, TNARS
bhofstetter AT tnars.net
http://www.tnars.net

http://my.opera.com/barryhofstetter/blog
http://mysite.verizon.net/nebarry









Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page