Re: Priority of LXX for NT meaning
David L. Moore (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Sat, 16 Nov 1996 11:18:17 -0500
At 06:40 AM 11/16/96 -0500, rjd wrote:
>FRED HALTOM asked:
>>The discussion about semantic domains has raised a question in my mind
>>that's been lurking there for some time. Does anyone know of any
>>comparative research on the influence of the LXX on NT word meaning?
>>Should it have priority over classical usus loquendi. For example,
>BAGD, Intro., 2d ed., p. xxi, "As for the influence of the LXX, every
>page of this lexicon shows that it outweighs all other influence on our
>For specific studies, you might start with: Moises Silva, _Biblical Words
>and Their Meanings: An Introduction to Lexical Semantics_ (Zondervan,
>1983; 2d ed., 1994). Part 1, ch. 2 is titled: "Semantic Change and the
>Role of the LXX."
It seems to me that a caveat should be added to the statement from
the BAGD introduction which Rod has cited (although the statement appears to
be true in what it says). The LXX exerts its greatest influence when the
terms being used in the NT are specifically theological or biblical.
Language that is couched in biblical style prose may also show marked LXX
influence, but many parts of the NT which are expressed in, more or less,
the 1st Century vernacular have greater affinity to more contemporary
sources, including the papyri, than to the LXX.
David L. Moore Director
Miami, Florida, USA Department of Education
email@example.com Southeastern Spanish District
http://www.netcom.com/~dvdmoore of the Assemblies of God