Biblical Hebrew Forum

["Jack Kilmon" <jkilmon AT historian.net>]

--------------------------------------------------
From: "Doug Belot" <dbelot AT bigpond.net.au>
Sent: Saturday, October 16, 2010 11:44 PM
To: "Jack Kilmon" <jkilmon AT historian.net>
Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] the hellenization of isaiah

> Hi Jack , my understanding is that all these terminologies centred around 
> YHWH , this name , and as such would  become obsolete by the use of the 
> LXX

No, the name would never become obsolete.  The High Priest would voice it in 
the Holy of Holies every year at Yom Kippur.  Its very presence, although 
unvoiced, in the scrolls gave the texts their sanctity.
The Septuagint did not come about until the 3rd century BCE under Ptolemy 
Philadelphus (309-246 BCE) and consisted of the Pentateuch.  The rest of the 
Tanakh was translated over the next two centuries.


> The fact that Jesus spoke from the LXX proves that he thought that was 
> sufficient .

Although the authors of the New Testament books, all Diaspora Jews, used the 
LXX frequently, Jesus' Tanakh quotes are paraphrastic.  He agrees with the 
proto-Mishnaic Hebrew texts and he appears to agree with the LXX on 
occasion, however, agreement with the LXX does not mean he is quoting from 
the LXX but the Hebrew that underlay the LXX.  There was a diverse textual 
tradition at that time and Jesus was more likely to hear the Aramaic targums 
at Synagogue following the Hebrew readings.

> He made it made it simple by that  use , searching for a name was no 
> longer relevant , Jesus has explained the name in its entirety , John 17:6 
> and 26 .
>
> Jesus then chose Paul to teach us ,  Paul set in cement by writing as he 
> did that Jesus was now the name that was above all names .

I have heard this often from members of the "Sacred Name Society."  I am not 
one who believes Jesus spent 3 years teaching his Talmidda and then suddenly 
chooses a Diaspora Jew to reinvent him.

> To try to go back to the hebrew and try and extract some name , other than 
> a name given by Jesus and Paul seems unecessary and the point I must ask 
> is why , why not be satisfied with what Jesus spoek and what Paul wrote, 
> and of course Luke.

The hagiographers wrote the Gospels in Greek in places like Antioch, 
Ephesus, Rome, Alexandria for Gentiles outside of Judea and Galilee.  They 
wrote them from 40 to 60 or 70 years after Jesus spoke (in Aramaic) and used 
both Aramaic written and oral accounts or Greek translations of Aramaic 
accounts.  Not one of them were ear or eye-witnesses to Jesus.


> For of course what you are doing is putting a name above the name given to 
> the main role player of Phil 2:9-11

First, Jesus (DJEE-zus) was NOT his name.  His name was Yeshua and the first 
part of that name stands for YHWH and it means "whose help is YHWH."  Also, 
you need to understand what a NAME was is the 1st century.  It was not just 
what you were called.   The "name" in this idiom stands for the substance 
and presence of the person.

The loss of idiom is responsible for most misunderstandings in exegesis. 
Take Mark, an Aramaic speaker writing in Greek. "Taking up serpents" 
nwlq$n )twwxw Judean Lq$) was an Aramaic idiom for "doing something 
dangerous" and "drinking poison" was an idiom for taking in errant 
teachings.  I think the Greek translation of this idiom  ὄφεις ἀροῦσιν  was 
accurate with the verb αἴρω to lift or carry.  The correspondence with Acts 
28:3-5 cannot be coincidence.

I am glad Jesus, when preparing to leave Capernaum for Jerusalem, did not 
tell his disciples, "Let's hit the road."  Today is Sunday and there would 
be a gaggle of people out on I-10 slapping the tarmac and being flattened by 
18-wheelers.

I think idiom is the primary source of mistranslation and misunderstanding.

Jack Kilmon


> doug belot
>
>
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Jack Kilmon" <jkilmon AT historian.net>
> To: "Doug Belot" <dbelot AT bigpond.net.au>; "Yigal Levin" 
> <leviny1 AT mail.biu.ac.il>; <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>
> Sent: Sunday, October 17, 2010 2:03 PM
> Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] the hellenization of isaiah
>
>
> > Jesus was not writing anything.  The tetragrammaton was often written in 
> > the
> > proto-Mishnaic texts (such as found in the DSS), in paleo-Hebrew script 
> > and
> > sometimes in red ink.  This was to "flag" it so the reader would voice 
> > it,
> > either aloud or mentally, as "adonai" (Lord).  When the LXX (Pentateuch) 
> > and
> > the Old Greek texts came about there were a number of conventions.  If 
> > Jesus
> > ever wrote anything it would have been Aramaic but the sources we have
> > record his use of ABBA/ABUNAN for God.  The New Testament authors all 
> > wrote
> > in Greek and used Aramaic sources, either written or oral, for Jesus' 
> > words.
> > If Matthew 4:7 is historical to Jesus Ἕφη αὐτῷ ὁ Ἰησοῦς, πάλιν γέγραπται,
> > Οὐκ ἐκπειράσεις Κύριον τὸν Θεόν σου , he would have said, "tub ktib: d'la
> > tnasse l'MARYA, alahak."  MARYA is the Aramaic for the Hebrew ADONAI and
> > both could refer to God, a teacher, a husband, a servant to the master 
> > and
> > was a title that Jesus' disciples and followers would use of him.
> > In the first temple period there was no prohibition against speaking the
> > name of God, YHWH, and it became blasphemy sometime in the 2nd temple
> > period.  This is why the theophoric components of names such as YEHO- in
> > YEHOshua (Joshua) were shortened in the 2nd temple period to Y'shua
> > (Yeshua/Jesus) to prevent accidentally voicing the Shem haMeforash.
> >
> > Jack Kilmon
> > San Antonio, TX
> >
> > --------------------------------------------------
> > From: "Doug Belot" <dbelot AT bigpond.net.au>
> > Sent: Saturday, October 16, 2010 4:08 PM
> > To: "Yigal Levin" <leviny1 AT mail.biu.ac.il>; <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>
> > Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] the hellenization of isaiah
> >
> > > 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
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > 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: 271.1.1/3201 - Release Date: 10/17/10 
> 04:33:00