From: Jim West (jwest@Highland.Net)
Date: Mon Aug 23 1999 - 17:17:26 EDT
At 01:59 PM 8/23/99 -0700, you wrote:
>I am willing to accept all of the evidence in Shanks' argument, the LXX
>reading (if it exists), the scrap from Cave 4 (if it is really Deut
>32:8) but Shank's conclusion that this evidence demonstrates that Israel
>was polytheistic up until late in the first millennium BC is pretty far
>fetched. The readings,
>Deut 32:8 LXX : hUIOI TOU QEOU
>the scrap from cave 4 : b'nai elohim
You are right- it is far fetched. Benei elohim and huioi tou theou are the
same thing so far as Israel's theologians would have been concerned!
>do not support the notion of polytheism. So it is Shanks' use of
>evidence which I am complaining about.
and rightly. Take a look at R. Albertz's "A History of Israelite Religion
in the Old Testament Period", or even better, "The Rise of Yahwism" J.C. DeMoor.
>But this is off topic for
>b-greek. My on topic question is just about the reading from the LXX. I
>would like to hear from some one who has access to the big critical
>edition of the LXX. What manuscripts support: hUIOI TOU QEOU in Deut
>32:8? I wonder why, if this was a problem reading in the MT, the variant
>was not included in Rahlfs.
I would be curious as to the evidence too. Rahlfs- of course- was pre DSS.
So he might have thought any LXX ms containing such a reading was bogus
anyway and not included it.
Jim West, ThD
web page- http://web.infoave.net/~jwest
--- B-Greek home page: http://sunsite.unc.edu/bgreek You are currently subscribed to b-greek as: [email@example.com] To unsubscribe, forward this message to leave-b-greek-329W@franklin.oit.unc.edu To subscribe, send a message to firstname.lastname@example.org
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:40:36 EDT