[B-Greek] How Markos reads the LXX (was future indicative inJonah 1:11 (Joseph Justiss)
Mark Lightman
lightmanmark at yahoo.com
Sat May 21 12:43:38 EDT 2011
No problem. We're good.
Mark L
FWSFOROS MARKOS
--- On Sat, 5/21/11, Jack Kilmon <jkilmon at historian.net> wrote:
From: Jack Kilmon <jkilmon at historian.net>
Subject: Re: [B-Greek] How Markos reads the LXX (was future indicative inJonah 1:11 (Joseph Justiss)
To: "Mark Lightman" <lightmanmark at yahoo.com>, "Albert Pietersma" <albert.pietersma at sympatico.ca>
Cc: b-greek at lists.ibiblio.org
Date: Saturday, May 21, 2011, 10:32 AM
OK, Mark. I was expecting a response based more on scholarship rather
than personal faith “perceptions” so there would be no sense in my
addressing misperceptions. At least I know where this paradigm comes
from.
Thanks
Jack
From: Mark Lightman
Sent: Saturday, May 21, 2011 10:39 AM
To: Albert Pietersma ; Jack Kilmon
Cc: b-greek at lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: Re: [B-Greek] How Markos reads the LXX (was future
indicative inJonah 1:11 (Joseph Justiss)
Jack wrote
<I have been
following this thread and I am not sure I am getting the sense of
this so I need your help on this.>
Hi, Jack,
If the
world really does end today, are you sure THIS is how you want to
spend the day?
<I am not quite grasping how the source
language can be ignored in an attempt to understand the sense of the
Greek...>
I guess I'm trying to read the LXX the way the
God-fearers did, who presumably did not know Hebrew.
<
...particularly when a text like Mark was written by someone whose
first language was Aramaic and whose Greek demonstrates Aramaic
syntax and structure.>
If you begin with the assumption
that Mark spoke Aramaic, you are going to find
semitisms.
If you begin with the assumption that he spoke Latin you can
find
Latinisms. If you begin with the assumption that he
spoke Greek you will just
find Koine Greek. "Very like a
whale." I have no idea what Mark's first language
was.
<BIBLICAL Greek, is, after all, a translational
Greek of Semitic materials, is it not?>
It may be. We had
a guy here on B-Greek a while back who was convinced that
even
Paul could not have written his letters in Greek. What was
funny about this
guy was that he wasn't sure if Paul wrote in
Hebrew or Aramaic or Latin (Latin!) but
he insisted he did not
write in Greek. This allowed the guy to say that the
Greek
NT as we have it now is a "translation of a translation"
and that only he knew what
the original New Testament REALLY
meant.
<Are you talking about a Greek for Greek's sake
only method regardless of original source material sense and
content?>
I'm not, no, but there is that old joke:
If the LXX was good enough for Moses, it's good
enough for
me.
ερρωσο, ω φιλε μου.
Mark L
FWSFOROS
MARKOS
--- On Sat, 5/21/11, Jack Kilmon
<jkilmon at historian.net> wrote:
From:
Jack Kilmon <jkilmon at historian.net>
Subject: Re:
[B-Greek] How Markos reads the LXX (was future indicative inJonah
1:11 (Joseph Justiss)
To: "Albert Pietersma"
<albert.pietersma at sympatico.ca>, "Mark Lightman"
<lightmanmark at yahoo.com>
Cc:
b-greek at lists.ibiblio.org
Date: Saturday, May 21, 2011, 7:39
AM
-----Original Message-----
From: Albert Pietersma
Sent: Friday, May 20, 2011 10:52
PM
To: Mark Lightman
Cc: b-greek at lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: Re:
[B-Greek] How Markos reads the LXX (was future indicative inJonah
1:11 (Joseph Justiss)
Mark,
If you have in mind
that we must read the Greek of the LXX in terms
of the Greek
language of the period, I couldn't agree more and can
only wish
that more scholars (including Septuagint scholars) would do
the
same. Though at times one may turn to the source language
to
arbitrate between existing senses of Greek words, at no
point ought
one superimpose a Hebrew sense on a Greek word
simply because Hebrew X
happens to be paired with Greek Y in
translation.
JK] I have been following this
thread and I am not sure I am getting the sense of this so I need
your help on this. The LXX was a translation of Early
Biblical Hebrew (EBH) texts (the Pentateuch) in the Greek of the
3rd century BCE in use in the ANE. Christians refer to any
Greek translations of the remaining Navi'im and Ketuvim as
"Septuagint" but they are more accurately called "Old Greek"
translations (Cross) done over another two or three centuries from
variant Hebrew and Aramaic (Daniel) exemplar texts and they append
the books of the New Testament, all authored in Greek of varying
competency from the 70's CE to 150 CE some of which is also
translational Greek from Hebrew LXX EBH or LBH texts and
Aramaic sources for the Jesus materials. I am not quite
grasping how the source language can be ignored in an attempt to
understand the sense of the Greek, particularly when a text like
Mark was written by someone whose first language was Aramaic and
whose Greek demonstrates Aramaic syntax and structure.
Doesn't the Semitic sense of a word or phrase being
translated assist in understanding the Greek translation?
Are you talking about a Greek for Greek's sake only method
regardless of original source material sense and
content?
BIBLICAL Greek, is, after all, a translational
Greek of Semitic materials, is it
not?
Best,
Jack
Jack Kilmon
San Antonio,
TX
More information about the B-Greek
mailing list