[B-Greek] SATAN in LXX
Jeff Smelser
jeffsmelser at ntgreek.net
Sat Jan 8 09:00:24 EST 2011
Al,
you comment:
"Of NO exegetical interest from a Greek perspective is the verse that
started this thread, namely, 3 Reigns (1 Kgs) 11:14 where the Greek
twice has σαταν, though MT has but a single occurrence of שטן. It is of
no exegetical interest because the translator doesn't translate. Why he
withholds his understanding of this Hebrew word is not possible to say.
Of interest is certainly that he transcribes his source exactly. Nothing
is added. The reader might thus read it either as a previously mentioned
name or as an indefinite epithet."
This is exactly my point and my question. My interest is not at all
exegetical. I'm simply wondering why, what was in the mind of the
translator, that would lead him to transliterate in this particular
passage. Were this sentence right here that I am writing right now being
translated into Chinese, it is inconceivable that the word
"inconceivable" would be merely transliterated. So that's my question:
why do we see the transliteration at 3 Ki. 11:14? And maybe there's no
answer. But I had hoped someone might have a clue, or a theory, that
would be at least interesting.
Thanks for the response. I was especially hoping to hear from you.
Jeff
On 1/7/2011 11:50 PM, Albert Pietersma wrote:
> What the Greek translators did with Hebrew שטן must be seen in larger
> perspective than either Job or a couple of other references. In MT
> the word occurs 29 times, both as a noun and as a verb. The noun has
> four Greek equivalents and the verb has two. In number it can be
> either singular or plural, arthrous or anarthrous. Exegetically,
> therefore, there is a good deal of information to study.
> Of NO exegetical interest from a Greek perspective is the verse that
> started this thread, namely, 3 Reigns (1 Kgs) 11:14 where the Greek
> twice has σαταν, though MT has but a single occurrence of שטן. It is
> of no exegetical interest because the translator doesn't translate.
> Why he withholds his understanding of this Hebrew word is not possible
> to say. Of interest is certainly that he transcribes his source
> exactly. Nothing is added. The reader might thus read it either as a
> previously mentioned name or as an indefinite epithet.
> Al
>
> On Jan 7, 2011, at 10:00 PM, Sarah J. Blake wrote:
>
>> I am intrigued by this discussion, as these matters come up in my
>> exegesis/teaching/preaching frequently. If there are any writings
>> about these distinctions in wording that anyone could point me to, I
>> would greatly appreciate the references. (I will check Exegetical
>> Dictionary, Theological Wordbook, etc. but would appreciate sources
>> for further study.)
>>
>> Thanks.
>>
>> Sarah J. Blake
>> Personal correspondence: sjblake at growingstrong.org
>> http://www.growingstrong.org
>>
>> Shop for items you need and support Sarah's site: http://amzn.to/bZHlZg
>>
>> ---
>> B-Greek home page: http://www.ibiblio.org/bgreek
>> B-Greek mailing list
>> B-Greek at lists.ibiblio.org
>> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-greek
>>
>
> —
> Albert Pietersma PhD
> 21 Cross Street,
> Weston ON Canada M9N 2B8
> Email: albert.pietersma at sympatico.ca
> Homepage: http://www.chass.utoronto.ca/~pietersm
>
>
>
> -----
> No virus found in this message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> Version: 10.0.1191 / Virus Database: 1435/3365 - Release Date: 01/07/11
>
>
>
More information about the B-Greek
mailing list