Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Sarai · 06-07-2011, 11:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by andrewcriddle

Quote:

Originally Posted by mountainman

.................................................. ...............

The authority on the LXX is certainly to be found with Origen, who appears to have authored the Hexapla. What earlier mentions are there between Josephus (or earlier than Josephus) and Origen by which it is infered that the Greek LXX was in circulation?

Are there any early papyri fragments? Are there any non christian references? In which century does the earliest evidence of the Greek LXX appear?

Best wishes

Pete

The oldest papyrus fragment of the LXX is apparently Papyrus_Rylands_458 it is paleographically dated to before 100 BCE.

Andrew Criddle

For what it's worth, there are also LXX fragments in the Dead Sea Scrolls, but the source I'm looking at specifies date no further than "the second or the first century BCE."

Regards,
Sarai

mountainman · 06-07-2011, 04:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by andrewcriddle

The oldest papyrus fragment of the LXX is apparently Papyrus_Rylands_458 it is paleographically dated to before 100 BCE.

Thanks Andrew,

This is an exceedingly fragmented papyri fragment.

Here's what WIKI says - I have bolded the last paragraph:

Quote:

Originally Posted by WIKI

Description

The text was written on papyrus in uncial letters. It is designated by the number 957 on the list of Septuagint manuscripts according to the numbering system devised by Alfred Rahlfs. The surviving texts of the Book of Deuteronomy are verses Deut 23:24(26)–24:3; 25:1–3; 26:12; 26:17–19; 28:31–33; 27:15; 28:2.[1]

The manuscript consists of only 8 small fragments, designated by the letters "a"–"h". Fragment "h" is the smallest and contains only two letters. The words are not divided by spaces, but written continuously. The writer uses the colometrical system, regularly leaving a space at the end of sentence or clause.[1]

The text of the manuscript agrees more with the Codex Cottonianus than with the Codex Vaticanus.[2]

The manuscript has been used in discussions about the Tetragrammaton, although there are actually blank spaces in the places where some scholars such as C. H. Roberts believe that it contained letters.[3] According to Paul E. Kahle, the Tetragrammaton must have been written in the manuscript where these breaks or blank spaces appear.[4]

The last paragraph appears to provide some data on whether or not there appears in these fragments any trace of "nomina sacra". We see the presence of the Tetragrammaton or do we?????. It seems rather contraversial.

Quote:

Originally Posted by WIKI

Tetragrammaton

The term Tetragrammaton (from Greek τετραγράμματον, meaning "[a word] having four letters")[1] refers to the name of the God of Israel YHWH (Hebrew: יהוה‎) used in the Hebrew Bible.

There is disagreement among both academics and some practising Jews and Christians on three main questions relating to the name:

The meaning of the name, and its possible relation to, as yet undiscovered, Canaanite parallels.

The original vowels of the name.

Whether the name was read outloud at certain points in history, and whether it should be today.

There is a bit to digest here. I imagine that there must be other papyri from the Greek LXX also dated before Origen in the 3rd century, and I would like to have a look at a few more when I get the chance. But this is a good start.

I would like to examine more evidence before returning to Papyrus_Rylands_458 and its paleographical dating to before 100 BCE.

Best wishes

Pete

mountainman · 06-07-2011, 04:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Doug Shaver

Quote:

Originally Posted by mountainman

Josephus is also a witness for the historical Jesus who was the Christ

Under your theory of Christian origins, how is that possible?

Some suspect Eusebius interpolated Josephus as a witness for the Greek new testament. The Letter of Aristeas is also conspicuously present in Josephus as a primary witness for the Greek LXX. Many suspect it is a forgery. Where does that leave us with the Greek LXX?

My question is about independent evidence for the physical appearance of the Greek LXX in antiquity.

One further thing is that AFAIK the "Christian Greek LXX" and the "Greek LXX" are supposedly able to be differentiated on the basis that the former employs an array of "nomina sacra" codes similar to those found in the new testament.

mountainman · 06-07-2011, 04:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by discordant

Now this one is interesting. The parallel text in Job is part of a lengthy postscript that only exists in the LXX, and it looks like a strong enough match to not be just coincidence.

(Aristeas) κατοικειν δε τουτον εν τη Αυσιτιδι χωρα επι τοις οροις της Ιδουμαιας και Αραβιας

(LXX, Job 42:17b) οὗτος ἑρμηνεύεται ἐκ τῆς Συριακῆς βίβλου ἐν μὲν γῇ κατοικῶν τῇ Αυσίτιδι ἐπὶ τοῖς ὁρίοις τῆς Ιδουμαίας καὶ Ἀραβίας προϋπῆρχεν δὲ αὐτῷ ὄνομα Ιωβαβ

Thanks again discordant for all this.

According to the sources mentioned here, this strong match is actually physically cited by Eusebius from the 4th century. Additionally, is the source Aristeas the same one from Josephus, or independent?

Anyway, many thanks for digging this stuff out of textcavation. There is also a primary reference in Eusebius's History. He wastes no time as he introduces the highly regarded Platonist Anatolius as the Christian Bishop of Laodicea, by having his source support Josephus's account of "The Letter of Aristeas", and a BCE chronology for the first Greek LXX .

Quote:

Eusebius (H.E.) Chapter XXXII.
The Distinguished Ecclesiastics Of Our Day, and Which of Them Survived Until the Destruction of the Churches.

6.... Anatolius was an Alexandrian by birth. In learning and skill in Greek philosophy, such as arithmetic and geometry, astronomy, and dialectics in general, as well as in the theory of physics, he stood first among the ablest men of our time, and he was also at the head in rhetorical science. It is reported that for this reason he was requested by the citizens of Alexandria to establish there a school of Aristotelian philosophy. 13 Anatolius did not write very many works; but in such as have come down to us we can discern his eloquence and erudition. In these he states particularly his opinions on the passover. It seems important to give here the following extracts from them. 14 From the Paschal Canons of Anatolius. "There is then in the first year the new moon of the first month, which is the beginning of every cycle of nineteen years, on the twenty-sixth day of the Egyptian Phamenoth; but according to the months of the Macedonians, the twenty-second day of Dystrus, or, as the Romans would say, the eleventh before the Kalends of April. 15 On the said twenty-sixth of Phamenoth, the sun is found not only entered on the first segment, but already passing through the fourth day in it. They are accustomed to call this segment the first dodecatomorion, and the equinox, and the beginning of months, and the head of the cycle, and the starting-point of the planetary circuit. But they call the one preceding this the last of months, and the twelfth segment, and the final dodecatomorion, and the end of the planetary circuit. Wherefore we maintain that those who place the first month in it, and determine by it the fourteenth of the passover, commit no slight or common blunder.

16 And this is not an opinion of our own; but it was known to the Jews of old, even before Christ, and was carefully observed by them. This may be learned from what is said by Philo, Josephus, and Musaeus; and not only by them, but also by those yet more ancient, the two Agathobuli, surnamed `Masters,` and the famous Aristobulus, who was chosen among the seventy interpreters of the sacred and divine Hebrew Scriptures by Ptolemy Philadelphus and his father, and who also dedicated his exegetical books on the law of Moses to the same kings.

17 These writers, explaining questions ........

20 The same writer has also left the Institutes of Arithmetic, in ten books, and other evidences of his experience and proficiency in divine things.

mountainman · 06-07-2011, 04:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sarai

For what it's worth, there are also LXX fragments in the Dead Sea Scrolls, but the source I'm looking at specifies date no further than "the second or the first century BCE."

Thanks Sarai,

That was news to me. I was not aware of Greek LXX fragments amidst the DSS. Any online articles?

discordant · 06-07-2011, 08:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mountainman

According to the sources mentioned here, this strong match is actually physically cited by Eusebius from the 4th century.

Yes, we only have it third-hand. Eusebius gets it from Polyhistor, and Polyhistor gets it from Aristeas. But Clement of Alexandria is a witness to other parts of Polyhistor's work.

Quote:

Additionally, is the source Aristeas the same one from Josephus, or independent?

Different person.

discordant · 06-07-2011, 09:17 PM

I hadn't realised there are Christians who are so disturbed by Paul and Jesus quoting the LXX that they try to reverse the order of dependence (link).

The same people seem to be tied in with the KJV-only crowd, which is hilarious because of the preface to the 1611 KJV (link).

[I]t pleased the Lord to stir up the spirit of a Greek Prince (Greek for descent and language) even of Ptolemy Philadelph King of Egypt, to procure the translating of the Book of God out of Hebrew into Greek. This is the translation of the Seventy Interpreters, commonly so called, which prepared the way for our Saviour among the Gentiles by written preaching, as Saint John Baptist did among the Jews by vocal.

Hahaha.

Ha.

Sarai · 06-08-2011, 10:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mountainman

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sarai

For what it's worth, there are also LXX fragments in the Dead Sea Scrolls, but the source I'm looking at specifies date no further than "the second or the first century BCE."

Thanks Sarai,

That was news to me. I was not aware of Greek LXX fragments amidst the DSS. Any online articles?

You're very welcome. I did a quick google and found these articles:

San Diego Natural History Museum DDS Exhibit

Dead Sea Scrolls Foundation

There weren't a lot of Greek MSS fragments found in comparison to the Hebrew & Aramaic. If I recall correctly there were 4 or so in Cave 4 and 19 in Cave 7. Cave 4 had the remains of 2 scrolls of Leviticus, 1 of Numbers, and 1 of Deuteronomy. Cave 7 had tiny remains of which they ID'ed a fragment as Exodus 28:4-7 and the letter of Jeremiah, verses 43-4.

There's probably more available out there on the net about the Greek texts, but I don't have time to go through them all. Hopefully, this will give you a bit of a start.

Regards,
Sarai

Sarai · 06-08-2011, 11:03 AM

Also found some photos of the Greek fragments here.

Hope this helps...
Sarai

semiopen · 06-08-2011, 11:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mountainman

The last paragraph appears to provide some data on whether or not there appears in these fragments any trace of "nomina sacra". We see the presence of the Tetragrammaton or do we?????. It seems rather contraversial.

Quote:

Originally Posted by WIKI

Tetragrammaton

The term Tetragrammaton (from Greek τετραγράμματον, meaning "[a word] having four letters")[1] refers to the name of the God of Israel YHWH (Hebrew: יהוה‎) used in the Hebrew Bible.

There is disagreement among both academics and some practising Jews and Christians on three main questions relating to the name:

The meaning of the name, and its possible relation to, as yet undiscovered, Canaanite parallels.

The original vowels of the name.

Whether the name was read outloud at certain points in history, and whether it should be today.

FWIW this is pronounced adonai in modern times which means my lord.

The are many places in the bible where YHWH Adonai or Adonai YHWH is found. This is vocalized as Adonai Elohim.

http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/vi...ch=adonai yhwh

Quote:

This word occurs in the Masoretic text 315 times by the side of the Tetragram YHWH (310 times preceding and five times succeeding it) and 134 times without it... At the beginning of the Hellenistic era, however, the use of the Name was reserved for the Temple.

There is no way (famous last words) that someone would write this if it would be said Adonai Adonai, so it is thought that this was not used after the custom of saying Adonai for YHWH arose.

My hunch is that the name was pronounced like it's spelled... Yahweh.

06-07-2011, 09:17 PM	#17
discordant Junior Member Join Date: May 2011 Location: Perth Posts: 57	I hadn't realised there are Christians who are so disturbed by Paul and Jesus quoting the LXX that they try to reverse the order of dependence (link). The same people seem to be tied in with the KJV-only crowd, which is hilarious because of the preface to the 1611 KJV (link). [I]t pleased the Lord to stir up the spirit of a Greek Prince (Greek for descent and language) even of Ptolemy Philadelph King of Egypt, to procure the translating of the Book of God out of Hebrew into Greek. This is the translation of the Seventy Interpreters, commonly so called, which prepared the way for our Saviour among the Gentiles by written preaching, as Saint John Baptist did among the Jews by vocal. Hahaha. Ha.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

06-08-2011, 11:03 AM	#19
Sarai Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: Chicago Metro Posts: 1,259	Also found some photos of the Greek fragments here. Hope this helps... Sarai

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.