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: TedBro AT aol.com
  • To: tensorpath AT gmail.com
  • Cc: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
  • Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] the hellenization of isaiah
  • Date: Sat, 16 Oct 2010 23:40:39 EDT

Hi, Fred:

My comments are in << brackets>> below.

Peace,
t.

In a message dated 10/16/2010 9:33:02 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
tensorpath AT gmail.com writes:

Hello Ted:

Thanks for your comments.

Please allow me to respond.

1. The verse in question (Isaiah 61:1) tends to prove acceptance of the
hebrew text over the greek. All of the mainstream english language bibles
(nkjv, niv, nasb, etc.) accept the hebrew and reject the greek version of
this
verse.

<<Mainstream translators tend to default to the MT reading unless there is
a problem with the text, in which case they will go to other Hebrew
manuscripts and then to the versions (LXX, Vulgate, etc.). That is a most
reasonable way to proceed, but we shouldn't decide which is text represents
the
"original" based on English translations.>>

2. It would appear that hellenization of Isaiah occurred in the second
and derivative greek translation that is Isaiah 61:1 quoted in Luke 4:18.
The
hebrew original begins with two couplets in parallel. The greek second
translation ends with two single clauses sandwiching a new and imperfect
couplet. Western greek thought tends toward the linear, whilst eastern hebrew

thought tends toward the circular. The shift from parallel clauses in Isaiah
61:1 to singular clauses evidences hellenization for that reason.

<<Ooo... that's a tough one. A careful study of parallelism, whether in
the Psalms or the Prophets, doesn't show a rigid consistency. You're
probably
right that the MT reading is superior in this case, but I don't see the
above as a good argument in its favor. There are just too many examples of
imperfect couplets in the Tanakh.>>

3. The faulty reproduction of Isaiah 61:1 in Luke 4:18, and the english
language bibles' acceptance of the hebrew symmetrical version, tends to
imply the hebrew language of the Luke autograph. That approximately two
thirds
of the n.t., refers to the o.t., and quotes liberally from the o.t., gives
further support to the conclusion.


<<Since Luke 4:18 is closer to the LXX than the MT, the opposite
conclusion would seem more appropriate, namely that Luke was written in Greek
and
quotes from a Greek text of the OT... unless I'm missing something.>>


The n.t., could have been authored in greek. Isaiah 61:1 however, stands
against that conclusion.

regards,

fred burlingame






Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page