O.T. quotes in the N.T.

Origen

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 1, 2021
Messages
296
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Christian
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
There appears to be a lot of interest in this topic. I thought it might be helpful to explore some examples.

The first example comes from Matt. 4:10\Luke 4:8.

Here is the N.T.:
κύριον τὸν θεόν σου προσκυνήσεις καὶ αὐτῷ μόνῳ λατρεύσεις
"The Lord your God you shall worship and him alone shall you serve."

Here are the texts of LXX and the MT (Deut. 6:14)
κύριον τὸν θεόν σου φοβηθήσῃ καὶ αὐτῷ λατρεύσεις
אֶת-יְהוָה אֱלֹהֶיךָ תִּירָא וְאֹתוֹ תַעֲבֹד
"The Lord your God you shall fear and him shall you serve."

The LXX and the MT are the same.

The N.T. differs from the LXX in two ways.
First, N.T. and the LXX have different verbs. The verb in the N.T. is προσκυνέω but the verb in the LXX is φοβέω (in red) and it agrees with the MT.
Second, the N.T. citation has the adjective (in blue) μόνος (= only) which is not found in the LXX or the MT.
 
Last edited:

JRT

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 30, 2016
Messages
721
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Christian
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Married
This is an example of the Hebrew/Jewish literary technique of "haggadic midrash" by which old scripture is integrated into new stories. The historicity of the stories is less important than the recognition that God continues to work in the world through his people. The synoptic gospels are full of haggadic midrash.
 

Andrew

Site Mentor
Moderator
Supporting Member
Joined
Aug 25, 2017
Messages
5,563
Age
36
Location
Texas
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Christian
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Single
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
I'm no expert in Textual Criticism especially at the level of identifying Hebrew and Greek synonyms and even the Rabbis know that any given Hebrew word can be identified with a number of other words. Adam for example means Man, Dirt, Red, etc
Supposedly there is a secret message in genesis when you use the meaning of each descendant...

1. Adam =man
2. Seth = substituted or put
3. Enosh = mortal
4. Kenan = nest or dwelling
5. Mahalalel = praiseworthy God
6. Jared = descent or come down
7. Enoch = initiate or teach
8. Methuselah = at his extent of time a shooting forth
9. Lamech = (meaning lost)
10. Noah = quiet, peace, rest
he
Man puts on Mortality as his dwelling, so the praiseworthy God shall come down to teach that at his extent (fullness) of time the lost may have peace and rest.

The order of the scribes was insane.
Letter for letter, no spaces and everytime a book was added they transcribed it all over again to add the new book and also destroyed the former copy.

I have heard Rabbis express great grief over the Greek translations because the greek vocabulary lacks meaning behind the Hebrew words.. a good example is with the English translations, HELL is a word invented by Jerome to replace the two very different realms of Sheol or Hades, one being Paradise/Abraham's bosom and the other being the greek word Tarteras for the lower parts of Hades/sheol, Jerome used the word Hell because there are no English words for these two places.

I am no Greek or Hebrew scholar so perhaps you know more than I do but contrary to popular belief, God did NOT give the Word through Hebrew alone, God was speaking of a certain tribe that was there at the time the authority was given, Scribes from all tribes eventually recorded the Word with no prejudice toward each other.

God said "I shall do a new thing" when revealing his covenant with the gentiles, he divinely orchestrated the "new language" translation for the preparing and grafting in of the gentiles, his choice was Greek and its no different from when the morning stars of the reformation began translating the Latin into the common language of the lay man.

God is Sovereign and Just, he handed the early Christians the Scriptures via the 72 translators so that they have them handy for witnessing to unbelievers and for the grafting in of gentiles just as he promised

6 translators from each of the 12 tribes came up with the same exact translations of the Hebrew to Greek, however the unbelieving Jews in order to hold their estate in the synagogues decided to re phrase certain prophecies that pointed to Christ and reset Gods canon with their own antiChristian canon of books, this action created a division in the synagogues to segregate the Christians and ultimately ban them entirely, the Christians still held to the pre Hebrew canon of books that was based on an earlier Hebrew Text that the greek was translated from.. all of this was to hold their estate. Revelation describes them as the synagogue of Satan, the parents of the blind man dodged the question of the miracle so they would not be kicked out of the synagogue, yes the unbelieving Jews in the synagogue replaced the original greek with a new canonized greek via Aquila 2nd Century, the Greek and Hebrew do NOT always use the same words
 

Origen

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 1, 2021
Messages
296
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Christian
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
I have heard Rabbis express great grief over the Greek translations because the greek vocabulary lacks meaning behind the Hebrew words.. a good example is with the English translations, HELL is a word invented by Jerome to replace the two very different realms of Sheol or Hades, one being Paradise/Abraham's bosom and the other being the greek word Tarteras for the lower parts of Hades/sheol, Jerome used the word Hell because there are no English words for these two places.
If you heard this from rabbis you should run and never listen to them again because that information is demonstrably false.


There are three words used for the netherworld in the Greek N.T.

(1) γέενναν = gehenna (The word "gehenna" is the word most often translated as "hell" by KJV in the N.T. but it is not the only one.)

Jerome transliterates (i.e. uses the closest corresponding letters of a different alphabet) the word "gehenna" (γέενναν) into Latin.

Matt. 10:28 et nolite timere eos qui occidunt corpus animam autem non possunt occidere sed potius eum timete qui potest et animam et corpus perdere in gehennam

Luke 12:5
ostendam autem vobis quem timeatis timete eum qui postquam occiderit habet potestatem mittere in gehennam ita dico vobis hunc timete


(2) ᾅδην = hades
Jerome translates the word "hades" (i.e. ᾅδην) as "infernus"

Acts 2:27 quoniam non derelinques animam meam in inferno, nec dabis sanctum tuum videre corruptionem.

Rev. 1:18 et vivus, et fui mortuus, et ecce sum vivens in sæcula sæculorum: et habeo claves mortis, et inferni.


(3) ταρταρόω = tartarus
Jerome also transliterates the word "tartarus" (ταρταρόω) and it is used only once in the N.T.

2Pet. 2:4 si enim Deus angelis peccantibus non pepercit sed rudentibus inferni detractos in tartarum tradidit in iudicium cruciatos reservari


Jerome never used the word "hell" and certainly did not invent it. The origin and etymology of that word is not Latin. A quick look at a dictionary will prove this point.
Screen Shot 2021-01-17 at 7.01.54 AM.png

Screen Shot 2021-01-17 at 7.04.04 AM.png
As you can see it has a germanic origin.
 
Last edited:

Origen

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 1, 2021
Messages
296
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Christian
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
The order of the scribes was insane.
Letter for letter, no spaces and everytime a book was added they transcribed it all over again to add the new book and also destroyed the former copy.
This kind of information comes from much later sources and traditions. Those are the claims of Rabbinic Judaism which were not codified until the sixth century in the Talumd. Exactly how much is accurate is difficult to know. However, we do know some things (and have evidence to prove it) which point away from those claims.

First, the fact that we have manuscripts (predating that information) proves that they were not necessarily destroy.
Second, in both Greek and Hebrew manuscripts we can see where the scribes corrected mistakes.
Third, both Hebrew and Greek manuscripts were written with no spaces. That was normal.

Here is a pic of one column from codex Vaticanus (a Christian text of the LXX). This is part of Jeremiah.
Screen Shot 2021-01-17 at 8.39.28 AM.png
As you can see no spaces. Again that was not odd. It was a normal practice and Christian did the same thing as this codex shows.

Codex Sinaiticus - See The Manuscript | Jeremiah |

And fourth we have manuscripts where the words and letter were not transcribed word for word and letter for letter. The truth is not all scribes were equal in their abilities. Some scribes were very good at what they did and others were not.
 
Last edited:

Origen

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 1, 2021
Messages
296
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Christian
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
I am no Greek or Hebrew scholar so perhaps you know more than I do but contrary to popular belief, God did NOT give the Word through Hebrew alone, God was speaking of a certain tribe that was there at the time the authority was given, Scribes from all tribes eventually recorded the Word with no prejudice toward each other.

God said "I shall do a new thing" when revealing his covenant with the gentiles, he divinely orchestrated the "new language" translation for the preparing and grafting in of the gentiles, his choice was Greek and its no different from when the morning stars of the reformation began translating the Latin into the common language of the lay man.

God is Sovereign and Just, he handed the early Christians the Scriptures via the 72 translators so that they have them handy for witnessing to unbelievers and for the grafting in of gentiles just as he promised

6 translators from each of the 12 tribes came up with the same exact translations of the Hebrew to Greek
I put all of these comments together because they all go pretty much to the same point.

The belief that the LXX is divinely inspired is certainly not new. Certain individuals over time have made the same claim regarding other translations as well (i.e. the Vulgate, KJV, etc.) Personally I do not believe any translation is divinely inspired. Moreover proving such a
proposition is really impossible. Nevertheless it is possible to collect objective evidence for a position in order to evaluate it fairly and honestly.

The first thing I would like to examine (at least in part) is the "Letter of Aristeas." I will just for the sake of argument accept it is genuine and reliable. A careful reading will reveal an important fact.

Aristeas 10 - We were present when the question was put to him, “How many thousand books are there in the library?” His reply was, “Over two hundred thousand, O King. I shall take urgent steps to increase in a short time the total to five hundred thousand. Information has reached me that the lawbooks of the Jews are worth translation and inclusion in your royal library.

The first thing to the note is word "lawbooks." The clear implication of that term is that it is a reference the Pentateuch (i.e. Torah, Law of Moses).

We also have a clear reference to Moses and his law in the letter.

Aristeas 114 -n "For you must not fall into the degrading idea that it was out of regard to mice and weasels and other such things that Moses drew up his laws with such exceeding care."

Josephus also makes this same point in Apion 2:45-46:

"And for his successor Ptolemy, who was called Philadelphus, he did not only set all those of our nation free, who were captive under him, but did frequently give money [for their ransom]; and, what was his greatest work of all, he had a great desire of knowing our laws, and of obtaining the books of our sacred scriptures: accordingly he desired that such men might be sent him as might interpret our law to him; and in order to have them well compiled, he committed that care to no ordinary persons, but ordained that Demetrius Phalereus, and Andreas, and Aristeas; the first, Demetrius, the most learned person of his age..."

These are our two earliest sources on the origin of the LXX.

Now why is this important and what does it show? It show that the whole of the Septuagint was not commissioned Ptolemy but ONLY the Law and not the prophets and the writings. Neither one of those is mentioned in the "Letter of Aristeas." Thus there is no evidence that the 72 elders has any hand in the translation of the prophets or the writings, again, only the Law.


Second, there is a more troubling aspect to the "Letter of Aristeas."

Aristeas 16 - These people worship God the overseer and creator of all, whom all men worship including ourselves, O King, except that we have a different name. Their name for him is Zeus and Jove. The primitive men, consistently with this, demonstrated that the one by whom all live and are created is the master and Lord of all. In your excelling all men by your nobility of soul, I beg you to release those held in slavery.”

The author of the letter is claiming that the God of the O.T. is the same god as Zeus and Jove and the only difference is the name. It is disturbing that this document would claim that the God of the Scriptures is to be identify as the same god as these pagan deities.
 
Last edited:

Origen

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 1, 2021
Messages
296
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Christian
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
And now back to the N.T., LXX, and MT. This is our second example.


Matt 2:15
ἐξ Αἰγύπτου ἐκάλεσα τὸν υἱόν μου
out of Egypt I called my son

Hosea 11:1 (LXX)
ἐξ Αἰγύπτου μετεκάλεσα τὰ τέκνα αὐτοῦ
out of Egypt I called his children

MT
מִמִּצְרַיִם, קָרָאתִי לִבְנִי
out of Egypt I called my son

In this case the N.T. follows the MT. There are four differences between between the N.T. and the LXX.

First, the verb in the N.T. and LXX are essentially the same verb but still different. The verb in Matthew 2:15 is καλέω while the verb in the LXX is μετακαλέω. The verb in LXX verb has a preposition (i.e. μετα + καλέω. This is not odd in Greek. Many verbs in Greek have a preposition as a prefix. However, it still must be noted that the two are not identical.

Second, both the N.T. and MT have “son” not children. If you compare the N.T. with LXX above in blue (N.T. υἱός = son, LXX τέκνον = children), the difference is obvious

Third, both the N.T. and MT use the singular form for the noun “son” while the LXX uses the plural form of the noun for child (i.e. children). So not only are they different nouns they are different in number.

Fourth, both the N.T. and the MT have “my son” while the LXX has “his children.” The N.T has the 1st person singular pronoun (i.e. μου = my) while the LXX has the 3rd person singular pronoun (i.e. αὐτοῦ = his).
 
Last edited:

Origen

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 1, 2021
Messages
296
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Christian
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
Here is a third example.

Matt. 27:46
θεέ μου θεέ μου, ἱνατί με ἐγκατέλιπες
my God, my God, why have you forsaken me

Psalm 21:2 LXX
ὁ θεὸς ὁ θεός μου, πρόσχες μοι, ἵνα τί ἐγκατέλιπές με
God, my God, attend to me, why have you forsaken me

Psalm 22:1 MT
אֵלִי אֵלִי לָמָה עֲזַבְתָּנִי
my God, my God, why have you forsaken me

Let it be noted that the N.T. quote is spot on with the MT. However, it is very obvious that Matt. 27:46 is not a word for word quote of the LXX. I will break this quote into three parts according to the colors I provided (i.e. blue, red, green).


1st Phrase
θεέ μου θεέ μου - N.T.
ὁ θεὸς ὁ θεός μου - LXX

First, the forms of the noun "God" are difference. The N.T. uses the vocative (i.e. θεε) while the LXX uses the nominative form (i.e. θεος).

Second, the LXX has the article twice (i.e. ) while the N.T. does not have the article at all.

Third, the N.T. uses the 1st person singular pronoun "my" (i.e.
μου) twice while the LXX has it only once.

2nd Phrase
πρόσχες μοι
The LXX has the additional phrase "attend to me" (i.e. πρόσχες μοι) which neither the MT or N.T. have.


3rd Phrase

ἱνατί με ἐγκατέλιπες - N.T.
ἵνα τί ἐγκατέλιπές με - LXX

At first glance these two phrases may appear different but the differences are minor.

(1) Below compare the N.T. form with the LXX form.
ἱνατί
ἵνα τί

They have the same letters (i.e. ινα + τι).

(2) The N.T. has the 1st person singular pronoun "me" before the verb (i.e. με ἐγκατέλιπες) while LXX has it after the verb (i.e. ἐγκατέλιπές με).
 
Last edited:

pinacled

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 24, 2015
Messages
2,553
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Non-Denominational
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Single
Here is a third example.

Matt. 27:46
θεέ μου θεέ μου, ἱνατί με ἐγκατέλιπες
my God, my God, why have you forsaken me

Psalm 21:1 LXX
ὁ θεὸς ὁ θεός μου, πρόσχες μοι, ἵνα τί ἐγκατέλιπές με
God, my God, attend to me, why have you forsaken me

Psalm 22:1 MT
אֵלִי אֵלִי לָמָה עֲזַבְתָּנִי
my God, my God, why have you forsaken me

Let it be noted that the N.T. quote is spot on with the MT. However, it is very obvious that Matt. 27:46 is not a word for word quote of the LXX. I will break this quote into three parts according to the colors I provided (i.e. blue, red, green).


1st Phrase
θεέ μου θεέ μου - N.T.
ὁ θεὸς ὁ θεός μου - LXX

First, the forms of the noun "God" are difference. The N.T. uses the vocative (i.e. θεε) while the LXX uses the nominative form (i.e. θεος).

Second, the LXX has the article twice (i.e. ) while the N.T. does not have the article at all.

Third, the N.T. uses the 1 person singular pronoun "my" (i.e.
μου) twice while the LXX has it only once.

2nd Phrase
πρόσχες μοι
The LXX has the additional phrase "attend to me" (i.e. πρόσχες μοι) which neither the MT or N.T. have.


3rd Phrase

ἱνατί με ἐγκατέλιπες - N.T.
ἵνα τί ἐγκατέλιπές με - LXX

At first glance these two phrases may appear different but the differences are minor.

(1) Below compare the N.T. form with the LXX form.
ἱνατί
ἵνα τί

They have the same letters (i.e. ινα + τι).

(2) The N.T. has the 1st person singular pronoun "me" before the verb (i.e. με ἐγκατέλιπες) while LXX has it after the verb (i.e. ἐγκατέλιπές με).
אֵלִ֣י אֵ֭לִי לָמָ֣ה עֲזַבְתָּ֑נִי רָח֥וֹק מִֽ֝ישׁוּעָתִ֗י דִּבְרֵ֥י שַׁאֲגָתִֽי׃

My God, my God, why have You abandoned me; why so far from delivering me and from my anguished roaring?]]

אֵלִי אֵלִי, לָמָה עֲזַבְתָּנִי; רָחוֹק מִישׁוּעָתִי, דִּבְרֵי שַׁאֲגָתִי.

2 My God, my God, why hast Thou forsaken me, and art far from my help at the words of my cry? ]]

Above are 2 examples of English to hebrew variants.
While the hebrew is consistent. The English sentence structure and specific words used vary.
Even if there are various english words such as roar, cry, and shout, theyre
synonymous.


I wonder if the hebrew to greek variants depended also on word choice and sentence structure from certain scribes.

One certainty is that, "attend to me" found in the lxx shared by origen is likely an addition contrary to all other scribes work in accuracy.

Blessings Always
 
Last edited:

pinacled

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 24, 2015
Messages
2,553
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Non-Denominational
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Single
Here is a third example.

Matt. 27:46
θεέ μου θεέ μου, ἱνατί με ἐγκατέλιπες
my God, my God, why have you forsaken me

Psalm 21:1 LXX
ὁ θεὸς ὁ θεός μου, πρόσχες μοι, ἵνα τί ἐγκατέλιπές με
God, my God, attend to me, why have you forsaken me

Psalm 22:1 MT
אֵלִי אֵלִי לָמָה עֲזַבְתָּנִי
my God, my God, why have you forsaken me

Let it be noted that the N.T. quote is spot on with the MT. However, it is very obvious that Matt. 27:46 is not a word for word quote of the LXX. I will break this quote into three parts according to the colors I provided (i.e. blue, red, green).


1st Phrase
θεέ μου θεέ μου - N.T.
ὁ θεὸς ὁ θεός μου - LXX

First, the forms of the noun "God" are difference. The N.T. uses the vocative (i.e. θεε) while the LXX uses the nominative form (i.e. θεος).

Second, the LXX has the article twice (i.e. ) while the N.T. does not have the article at all.

Third, the N.T. uses the 1 person singular pronoun "my" (i.e.
μου) twice while the LXX has it only once.

2nd Phrase
πρόσχες μοι
The LXX has the additional phrase "attend to me" (i.e. πρόσχες μοι) which neither the MT or N.T. have.


3rd Phrase

ἱνατί με ἐγκατέλιπες - N.T.
ἵνα τί ἐγκατέλιπές με - LXX

At first glance these two phrases may appear different but the differences are minor.

(1) Below compare the N.T. form with the LXX form.
ἱνατί
ἵνα τί

They have the same letters (i.e. ινα + τι).

(2) The N.T. has the 1st person singular pronoun "me" before the verb (i.e. με ἐγκατέλιπες) while LXX has it after the verb (i.e. ἐγκατέλιπές με).
Would you please provide a link to the lxx greek to english along with the complete verse from psalms.

Thankyou
 
Last edited:

pinacled

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 24, 2015
Messages
2,553
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Non-Denominational
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Single
אֵלִ֣י אֵ֭לִי לָמָ֣ה עֲזַבְתָּ֑נִי רָח֥וֹק מִֽ֝ישׁוּעָתִ֗י דִּבְרֵ֥י שַׁאֲגָתִֽי׃

My God, my God, why have You abandoned me; why so far from delivering me and from my anguished roaring?]]

אֵלִי אֵלִי, לָמָה עֲזַבְתָּנִי; רָחוֹק מִישׁוּעָתִי, דִּבְרֵי שַׁאֲגָתִי.

2 My God, my God, why hast Thou forsaken me, and art far from my help at the words of my cry? ]]

Above are 2 examples of English to hebrew variants.
While the hebrew is consistent. The English sentence structure and specific words used vary.
Even if there are various english words such as roar, cry, and shout, theyre synonyms.

I wonder if the hebrew to greek variants depended also on word choice and sentence structure from certain scribes.

One certainty is that, "attend to me" found in the lxx shared by origen is likely an addition contrary to all other scribes work in accuracy.

Blessings Always
Though ole sh'aul perhaps scribed in greek for contemporary readers.
The sentence structure is closer in relation to hebrew. Something of which is found throughout the epistles.

The use of and, and in repetition is one such example of hebrew sentencing by ole sh'aul.

A comparable aspect example would be spanish and english sentence structure.
While geographical announciations may differ.
The same message is conveyed no matter the construct order communicated.
 

pinacled

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 24, 2015
Messages
2,553
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Non-Denominational
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Single
Origen,
Thankyou for the wonderful conversation in oil.
 

Origen

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 1, 2021
Messages
296
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Christian
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
Would you please provide a link to the lxx greek to english along with the complete verse from psalms.

Thankyou
I am using this critical edition.

Septuaginta, edited by Alfred Rahlfs
Editio altera by Robert Hanhart
©2006 Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, Stuttgart.

The Septuagint | Old Testament | Original Texts | Homepage | Die-Bibel.de

This is the complete verse.
ὁ θεὸς ὁ θεός μου, πρόσχες μοι· ἵνα τί ἐγκατέλιπές με;
μακρὰν ἀπὸ τῆς σωτηρίας μου οἱ λόγοι τῶν παραπτωμάτων μου.
 

pinacled

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 24, 2015
Messages
2,553
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Non-Denominational
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Single
No problem and you are very welcome.
Is there a way to post the psalms in greek to English in whole?
Both greek and english.
I'm unfamiliar with greek.

Linguistics and history are weak areas of my studies.

Latin and hebrew are areas I've studied.
 
Last edited:

pinacled

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 24, 2015
Messages
2,553
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Non-Denominational
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Single
Though ole sh'aul perhaps scribed in greek for contemporary readers.
The sentence structure is closer in relation to hebrew. Something of which is found throughout the epistles.

The use of and, and in repetition is one such example of hebrew sentencing by ole sh'aul.

A comparable aspect example would be spanish and english sentence structure.
While geographical announciations may differ.
The same message is conveyed no matter the construct order communicated.
The repetition of 'and, is also found in Yeshua's(jesus) speech in the account of yochanon.

John 14:6
 

pinacled

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 24, 2015
Messages
2,553
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Non-Denominational
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Single
אֵלִ֣י אֵ֭לִי לָמָ֣ה עֲזַבְתָּ֑נִי רָח֥וֹק מִֽ֝ישׁוּעָתִ֗י דִּבְרֵ֥י שַׁאֲגָתִֽי׃

My God, my God, why have You abandoned me; why so far from delivering me and from my anguished roaring?]]

אֵלִי אֵלִי, לָמָה עֲזַבְתָּנִי; רָחוֹק מִישׁוּעָתִי, דִּבְרֵי שַׁאֲגָתִי.

2 My God, my God, why hast Thou forsaken me, and art far from my help at the words of my cry? ]]

Above are 2 examples of English to hebrew variants.
While the hebrew is consistent. The English sentence structure and specific words used vary.
Even if there are various english words such as roar, cry, and shout, theyre
synonymous.


I wonder if the hebrew to greek variants depended also on word choice and sentence structure from certain scribes.

One certainty is that, "attend to me" found in the lxx shared by origen is likely an addition contrary to all other scribes work in accuracy.

Blessings Always
John 10:30
 

pinacled

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 24, 2015
Messages
2,553
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Non-Denominational
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Single
The repetition of 'and, is also found in Yeshua's(jesus) speech in the account of yochanon.

John 14:6
וַיַּרְא

And ?

Shemot 32
 

pinacled

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 24, 2015
Messages
2,553
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Non-Denominational
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Single
וַיַּרְא

And ?
Where is the and in the greek lxx?

Shemot 32
א וַיַּרְא הָעָם, כִּי-בֹשֵׁשׁ מֹשֶׁה לָרֶדֶת מִן-הָהָר; וַיִּקָּהֵל הָעָם עַל-אַהֲרֹן, וַיֹּאמְרוּ אֵלָיו קוּם עֲשֵׂה-לָנוּ אֱלֹהִים אֲשֶׁר יֵלְכוּ לְפָנֵינוּ--כִּי-זֶה מֹשֶׁה הָאִישׁ אֲשֶׁר הֶעֱלָנוּ מֵאֶרֶץ מִצְרַיִם, לֹא יָדַעְנוּ מֶה-הָיָה לוֹ.

1 And when the people saw that Moses delayed to come down from the mount, the people gathered themselves together unto Aaron, and said unto him: 'Up, make us a god who shall go before us; for as for this Moses, the man that brought us up out of the land of Egypt, we know not what is become of him.'


It seems to me that "and, is a notch thread part of the scabbard where a sword rest.
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom