Re: FiILARGURIA and Jer. 8:10 LXX

From: Edward Hobbs (
Date: Sat May 23 1998 - 16:05:33 EDT

Jeffrey Gibson inquires:---->>>>

The author of the Meyer commentary on 1 Tim cites Jer. 8:10 LXX as a
rough parallel to the use of FILARGURIA in 1 Tim 6:10 (NT hapax). But my
copy of the LXX (sadly the Brenton translation) lacks anything like this
at Jer. 8:10, where the second half of v. 10 and all of v. 11 as in the
MT is missing. So I wondering if anyone who has a LXX with a critical
apparatus could tell me if there is an LXX manuscript which contains the
equivalent of the missing text and, if so, what it reads.
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<--------------------end of quote

The LXX of Jeremiah, as you know, is quite divergent from the MT in many
ways, transpositions being the most notorious among them. There are also
quite a few omissions, Jer. 8:10b-12 being the first of a list of the "most
noteworthy" (Swete). A. W. Streane published _Double Text of Jeremiah_
102 years ago (I'm sometimes no more up-to-date than that), in which he
argued that especially in the matter of these omissions, the LXX text
represents an earlier and better Hebrew original than the MT. He says that
this LXX-omission / MT-addition is proably constructed by Massoretes from

Swete's apparatus says that this passage in Greek is found in the margin
(as a gloss) of Codex Marchalianus (Q), 12th century--obviously a back-
translation by a careful scholar (like Erasmus with the end of the
Apocalypse!?). This is one more reason that it is worth owning the
wonderful old 3+1 volume edition of Swete, and not just Rahlf's.
(Happily, I have both of them both in my office and in my basement study
here at home.)

Now, this helps in no way to explain the comment on 1 Tim 6:10. That
might be a misprint or typo or the like.

Edward Hobbs

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:39:44 EDT