From: Rolf Furuli (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Thu Aug 14 1997 - 09:51:48 EDT
I don`t think we should continue our discussion in this forum.
Some short answers to your questions:
>My question: Was YHWH directly changed into KS, or, rather, via KYROS?
I dont`t know.
>>(3) NT manuscripts younger than 150 CE have KS where Hebrew text quoted has T
>Ad (2) and (3): How can you prove that? Is KS really short for YHWH, or,
>perhaps, for KYROS? In my opinion, _KS_ should rather be considered an
>abriviation for KYROS. Thus indicating that KYROS was the original (KS <
>KYROS). Whether someone before that has changed YHWH into KYROS (*YHWH >
>Kyros) is another question, but I just cannot see that the KS as such is an
>index for the alteration: KS < *YHWH.
"KS" IS an abbreviation for KURIOS. LXX "Genesis", Chester Beatty Biblical
Papyrii, 1934, has KS in Gen 8:1 etc while the H text has YHWH.
>Perhaps the real important name in the early NT Era was Jesus? (cf. Acta
>22:16 and Rom 10:12-14); etc.).
Certainly, but without neglecting the one who sent Jesus and glorified him
(John 3:16; Acts 3:13).
>>BTW, IAW is a phonetic transcription and I have never heard that such a
>>thing is not pronounced by the phonemes it represents, so IAW is pronounced
>But w h o made these mss; Christians, or Jews (and for w h o m [Jews])?
Not Christians, probably Jews.
>That the NT originally contained the Holy Name remanes a hypothesis; at
>least in my opinion.
Any reconstruction is hypothetical, based on more or less compelling evidence.
University of Oslo
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:38:25 EDT