Biblical Hebrew Forum

[fred burlingame <tensorpath AT gmail.com>]

George:

Please permit me to address your last comment concerning the title of this
thread.

i believe the title of the thread ("the hellenization of isaiah")
appropriate.

The hebrew language represents perhaps the highest cultural expression of
the hebrew people. Hebrew puns (for example, but without limitation)
punctuate and flourish across the pages of hebrew text. Translation of the
hebrew into greek (or english or chinese) necessarily involves the loss of
these puns and the corresponding rich cultural fabric of the hebrews; and
the incorporation of the culture of the translated language.

Hence, the septuagint achieves "the hellenization of isaiah."

regards,

fred burlingame

On Sun, Oct 17, 2010 at 12:22 AM, George Athas 
<George.Athas AT moore.edu.au>wrote:

> Fred,
>
> There are many partial manuscripts of the New Testament that pre-date
> Sinaiticus, Alexandrinus, and Vaticanus (which are the earliest codices of
> the entire New Testament, but not the earliest manuscripts of smaller
> portions of the New Testament). Some manuscripts date to the second and
> third centuries AD. There is, however, absolutely no manuscript evidence for
> Hebrew originals of any New Testament document. Those who propose a Hebrew
> original to Matthew do so on the basis of (1) The mention of a Hebrew
> original by Papias in the second century AD; and (2) the assumption of
> Matthean priority over Mark (which is generally not accepted by modern
> scholarship).
>
> You seem to be working on the assumption that the New Testament was written
> to the Christians in Judea. However, this ignores the basic addressees of
> many New Testament documents. There is no indication in any New Testament
> document that the document was written for Hebrew-speaking Christians in
> Judea. On the contrary, most of the recipients seems to have been either
> diaspora Jews or Gentiles. And since Greek was the international language of
> the day, Greek was chosen as the language of communication. There is nothing
> sensational, controversial, or illogical about this. The burden for showing
> proof that any New Testament document was written in Hebrew lies with those
> who claim it. All the evidence seems to suggest otherwise.
>
> Also, I agree with Ted that ‘hellenization’ is not the correct term for
> this discussion, as it has distinct cultural overtones with the original
> question does not seem to be implying.
>
>
> GEORGE ATHAS
> Moore Theological College (Sydney, Australia)
> www.moore.edu.au
> _______________________________________________
> b-hebrew mailing list
> b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
>  http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew
>