Important Announcement

See here for an important message regarding the community which has become a read-only site as of October 31.

 
Post Reply
Page 3 of 3  •  Prev 1 2 3
Switch to Forum Live View Origen's Hexapla and the Divine Name
2 years ago  ::  Sep 03, 2015 - 3:01PM #21
five_point_dad
Posts: 4,719

Sep 3, 2015 -- 1:52PM, Newtonian wrote:

FPD - You agree with Oeste that I posted Hebrew text rather than Greek text? 


I know you know better than that!


You give no evidence that LXX had the title Kyrios/Lord replacing the Divine Name before or during Jesus' time.   Where is your evidence?  Where are your photostats?


Where did I say you posted Hebrew texts rather than Greek?  I said I agreed with Oeste in his statement that your argument is not with us, but with the text.  I don't have the capability of posting photostats.  I wish I did.  I got some of that material from www.tetragrammaton.org/tetrapdxj.html, which you would find amusing, I'm sure.  You still have the insurmountable problem of the total and complete absence of the divine name from any Greek mss.  You haven't overcome that yet, and I can't see how you ever will.  Origen's Hexpala is not the inspired Scripture. 


Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  Sep 04, 2015 - 4:09PM #22
Newtonian
Posts: 14,082

Oeste posted that - and then you posted you agreed with Oeste.  I guess you missed what Oeste posted and didn't realize what you were agreeing with!

Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  Sep 04, 2015 - 4:15PM #23
Newtonian
Posts: 14,082

FPD - Origen's Hexapla is a translation of inspired Scripture (most columns - one was in Hebrew).


All extant NT mss. are copies of inspired Scripture.


Neither copyists nor translators are miraculously inspired.


However, Origen's Hexapla helps scholars determine when the Divine Name was removed from the Greek Septuagint text (LXX) and replaced with Greek kyrios = Lord .


As, for example, in the greatest commandment in the Bible at Deuteronomy 6:4,5 (where the Divine Name is found 3 times) which was quoted accurately (Jehovah's Witnesses believe) by Jesus Christ.

Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  Sep 04, 2015 - 5:15PM #24
five_point_dad
Posts: 4,719

Sep 4, 2015 -- 4:15PM, Newtonian wrote:

FPD - Origen's Hexapla is a translation of inspired Scripture (most columns - one was in Hebrew).


All extant NT mss. are copies of inspired Scripture.


Neither copyists nor translators are miraculously inspired.


However, Origen's Hexapla helps scholars determine when the Divine Name was removed from the Greek Septuagint text (LXX) and replaced with Greek kyrios = Lord .


As, for example, in the greatest commandment in the Bible at Deuteronomy 6:4,5 (where the Divine Name is found 3 times) which was quoted accurately (Jehovah's Witnesses believe) by Jesus Christ.




NEWT: - Origen's Hexapla is a translation of inspired Scripture (most columns - one was in Hebrew).


FPD: Depends on how you define "inspired."  Orthodox Christianity has usually considered the original Hebrew of the OT and the original Greek of the NT as inspired, not the copies nor the translations.  Origen actually had seven columns in his Hexapla.  The first was the Hebrew as you stated.  The second was the transliteration of the Hebrew in the Greek of his day.  The third was Aquila's Greek of the LXX.  The fourth  was Symmachus' translation of the OT.  The fifth was the standard LXX.  The sixth was Thodotion's rendering and the seventh column he used for his own notes concerning variations.  Origen didn't consider this as part of his work so he only called it a six column document.  It should also be noted that no full copy of this document as ever been located.  All we have are scraps and pieces of it.  It must have occupy 50 volumes and we only have a few of them. 

NEWT:  All extant NT mss. are copies of inspired Scripture.


FPD: Column #1 certainly was.  The rest were translations.  Whenever you translate something into a different language, it is impossible to perfectly reproduce it.  I wouldn't say the translations were inspired documents. 


NEWT:  Neither copyists nor translators are miraculously inspired.   However, Origen's Hexapla helps scholars determine when the Divine Name was removed from the Greek Septuagint text (LXX) and replaced with Greek kyrios = Lord .


FPD: I don't see how.  The rendering in Hebrew would normally have the divine name in Hebrew.  Origen used the tetragrammaton in the Hebrew with the lone exception of Ps. 17:29.  (Why he didn't use it there remains a mystery.)  He also used the surrogate "K" or "KE" which is an abbreviation for KURIOS.  That would indicate that he believed KURIOS was an alternative reading in the LXX.  He made similar notations in Symmachus' column for Ps. 28:1, in Aquila column for Ps. 29:3 and Theodotion column for Ps. 30:6.  In the LXX column for Ps. 28:1 he used the tetragrammaton with a definite article, and then he added THU which is an abbreviation for THEOS.  In one of the columns he used "The Lord God" as the ending phrase of this Ps.  He had access to multiple copies of the LXX and noted the textual variations by using multiple entries as noted in those examples.  In his commentary of Ps. 2 he wrote, "Against the KURIOS and against his XRISTOS [anointed].  So, it would seem to me that he had LXX documents that included KURIOS.  The tetragrammaton in the Hebrew would have been unpronounciable but when recited in Hebrew it was ADONAI but when recited in Greek, it was KURIOS.  That's probably how it ends up in both the LXX and the NT when quoting the OT. 

NEWT:  As, for example, in the greatest commandment in the Bible at Deuteronomy 6:4,5 (where the Divine Name is found 3 times) which was quoted accurately (Jehovah's Witnesses believe) by Jesus Christ.


FPD: Once again, your theory is based upon the highly questionable premise that the theology of the Watchtower is accurate, and it is not based upon inspired Scripture.  Because the Watchtower's teaching is that the divine name should be there, you will stop at nothing to pretend that it really is there.  The fact remains that no inspired text of the NT contains the name.  Because of that fact, your are forced to create a mythical legend of some group that didn't exist and hated the name changing all the occurrences.  That is a fictional tale promoted by the Watchtower Society in a futile effort to sell its theory which is totally destroyed by the simple facts of the manuscripts that we have. 



Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  Sep 04, 2015 - 5:17PM #25
five_point_dad
Posts: 4,719

Sep 4, 2015 -- 4:09PM, Newtonian wrote:

Oeste posted that - and then you posted you agreed with Oeste.  I guess you missed what Oeste posted and didn't realize what you were agreeing with!


I was agreeing with him that your argument isn't against us.  We are simply reporting the textual situation and the facts that obviously don't agree with the Watchtower's theory.  You're disagreeing, not with us, but with the Bible text. That was the limit of my concurrence.

Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  Sep 05, 2015 - 12:27AM #26
Oeste
Posts: 3,711

Sep 2, 2015 -- 9:52PM, Newtonian wrote:


Oeste - You have a problem reading photostats?  That was Greek texts, not Hebrew texts - yet you posted:


Newt, you found the Tetragrammaton in the Hebrew text!


_____________________________


You have any meaningful response to the evidence presented, or are you just posting to ridicule?




Newt, it wouldn't matter if Origen re-constructed Psalms in German or Farsi.


All Origen is saying is that the Tetrgrammaton can be found when reading the Hebrew text, he's not saying the Tetragrammaton should be present in Christian scripture.


As reported at tetragrammaton.com:


It is clear from Origen's statement that he recognized that the Tetragrammaton was embedded in certain Septuagint texts. However, we must be particularly careful that we do not make the mistake of identification-by-association. We cannot take this brief quotation from Origen's commentary on Psalm 2 out of its context and allow ourselves to believe that Origen was saying that the earliest copies of the Christian Scriptures used the Tetragrammaton in paleo-Hebrew characters.


In no way was Origen reporting that the Tetragrammaton was found in "the most accurate manuscripts" of the Christian Scriptures. We must only read the context of this quotation which was discussing a Hebrew Scripture passage to realize that this was not Origen's intent. Surprisingly, we also see that Origen fully accepted Kyrios as an appropriate translation of the Tetragrammaton when the Hebrew Scriptures themselves were translated into Greek.


Don't blame me Newt. Blame the author.

Never argue with stupid people. They will drag
you down to their level and then beat you with
experience ~ Mark Twain

If you are neutral on situations of injustice
you have chosen the side of the oppressor ~
Desmond Tutu
Quick Reply
Cancel
1 year ago  ::  Oct 31, 2015 - 11:20AM #27
Newtonian
Posts: 14,082

FPD - Nice debate tactics FPD and Oeste.


The fact remains that all extant Greek LXX mss. contain the Divine Name until after Jesus' time and mostly up until Origen's time.


There is no manuscript evidence that the Divine Name was removed by Jesus' time!


Let's review some of the evidence (in my next post)

Quick Reply
Cancel
1 year ago  ::  Oct 31, 2015 - 11:30AM #28
Newtonian
Posts: 14,082

FOD - You posted to my post:


Neither copyists nor translators are miraculously inspired.   However, Origen's Hexapla helps scholars determine when the Divine Name was removed from the Greek Septuagint text (LXX) and replaced with Greek kyrios = Lord .




FPD: I don't see how.  The rendering in Hebrew would normally have the divine name in Hebrew.  Origen used the tetragrammaton in the Hebrew with the lone exception of Ps. 17:29.  (Why he didn't use it there remains a mystery.)  He also used the surrogate "K" or "KE" which is an abbreviation for KURIOS.  That would indicate that he believed KURIOS was an alternative reading in the LXX.  He made similar notations in Symmachus' column for Ps. 28:1, in Aquila column for Ps. 29:3 and Theodotion column for Ps. 30:6.  In the LXX column for Ps. 28:1 he used the tetragrammaton with a definite article, and then he added THU which is an abbreviation for THEOS.  In one of the columns he used "The Lord God" as the ending phrase of this Ps.  He had access to multiple copies of the LXX and noted the textual variations by using multiple entries as noted in those examples.  In his commentary of Ps. 2 he wrote, "Against the KURIOS and against his XRISTOS [anointed].  So, it would seem to me that he had LXX documents that included KURIOS.  The tetragrammaton in the Hebrew would have been unpronounciable but when recited in Hebrew it was ADONAI but when recited in Greek, it was KURIOS.  That's probably how it ends up in both the LXX and the NT when quoting the OT. 

_________________


A plausible theory - but not for Jesus quoting of LXX verses containing the Divine Name.   For Jesus the tetragrammaton was not only pronounceable but also he knew the correct pronunciation!


I.e. your theory is plausible for apostate Christians at Origen's time, but not for Jesus and his followers at Jesus' time.   And thus this does pinpoint the removal of the Divine Name around Origen's time - in some mss. earlier.


I highlighted your latter point - you are simply wrong - Jesus would not have pronounced the tetragrammaton as adonai!   That is the pronunciation of H136 (adonay/Lord) not H3968 (Yehovah = Jehovah).   And certainly Jesus would not have pronounced the tetragrammaton is kuyrios!
Quick Reply
Cancel
Page 3 of 3  •  Prev 1 2 3
 
    Viewing this thread :: 0 registered and 1 guest
    No registered users viewing
    Advertisement

    Beliefnet On Facebook