Translating OT from Septuagint

[SavedByGrace]

I was asking if this is the same Jerome.

I like Gordon Fee. He is pentecostal.

It does go to discernment, I suppose. We all make those decisions.

the guiding by the Holy Spirit in ALL our daily lives is essential. When engaged in the vast subject of textual studies, with so many translations now available, and with different readings, it is here that we need to seek the Holy Spirit, as He alone leads us to the Truth.

 

[SavedByGrace]

I believe that is false witness about Thayer. People seem to trace it back to Green only.

are you saying that Thayer was not a Unitarian? have a read of this, Thayer, Joseph Henry: A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament

Doctrinal Error in Thayer's Lexicon | SHARPER IRON

 

[SavedByGrace]

Perhaps this BibleHub excerpt on Origen helps explain Augustine's reluctance to adopt Jerome's position (there is considerably more information available through the link):

...
It was Origen's belief, and he was not alone in his opinion (cf. Justin Martyr's Dial. with Trypho, chap. 71), that the Hebrew Old Testament had been seriously altered by the Jews, and that the LXX (an inspired translation, as it was commonly held to be by the Christians) alone represented the true form of Scripture. For two centuries before and more than a century after Christ the LXX stood in high repute among the Jews, even in Palestine, and outside of Palestine had almost completely taken the place of the original Hebrew. Under the influence of its universal use among the Jews the Christians adopted it, and looked upon it as inspired Scripture just as truly as if it had been in the original tongue. Early in the second century (as Schürer points out) various causes were at work to lessen its reputation among the Jews. Chief among these were first, the growing conservative reaction against all non-Hebraic culture, which found its culmination in the Rabbinic schools of the second century; and second, the ever-increasing hostility to Christianity. The latter cause tended to bring the LXX into disfavor with the Jews, because it was universally employed by the Christians, and was cited in favor of Christian doctrines in many cases where it differed from the Hebrew text, which furnished less support to the particular doctrine defended. It was under the influence of this reaction against the LXX, which undoubtedly began even before the second century, that the various versions already mentioned took their rise.
...

Origen's Earnest Study of the Divine Scriptures.​

Jerome was a great Bible textual scholar, not Augustine!

 

[Deacon]

Jerome was:

1) a great Bible textual scholar,
2) not Augustine!​

​

Gosh, I agree with you. LOL

One common misconception is that there is only one Septuagint.

• The fact is there are many different versions of the Greek OT
• Many (many, many) different authors translated what we now call the Septuagint (or LXX) and within each version there is a wide variety of translation methods.

Merry Christmas

Rob

 

[SavedByGrace]

​

Gosh, I agree with you. LOL

One common misconception is that there is only one Septuagint.

• The fact is there are many different versions of the Greek OT
• Many (many, many) different authors translated what we now call the Septuagint (or LXX) and within each version there is a wide variety of translation methods.

Merry Christmas

Rob

A very Happy Christ-mas to you and your family. May our Great God bless you all

 

[Conan]

are you saying that Thayer was not a Unitarian? have a read of this, Thayer, Joseph Henry: A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament

Doctrinal Error in Thayer's Lexicon | SHARPER IRON

Like I said, no real evidence. False witness, probably originated by one bible "onlyist".

Here is from his own words, which count far more than suggestions by unnamed people.

was henry joseph thayer unitarian - Google Search

he writes to a pastor
desirous of reading up on the deity of Christ:
But in preparing to present from the pulpit any doctrine of the truth of
which I was thoroughly convinced (like the present doctrine), I have usually
found myself most helped by reading the ablest books on the other side. By
doing this, one not only best discovers what the actual difficulties of an
unbeliever are, but has suggested to him (often) the best methods of meeting
them.

And

"
JOSEPH HENRY THA YER 265
one who in wide erudition and advanced scholarship "knew it
all," and yet held fast to every vital point of the old faith.
Three passages from his letters will illustrate my meaning:

The really strong argument in support of Christ's pre-existence has
always seemed to me to be the concurrent, yet (at least as respects its form)
independent, representations of the biblical writers, not even excepting the
synoptists; for, although the first three gospels contain no explicit assertion
of the doctrine, the personage they portray forbids his classification with
ordinary men, and leaves so unique and exalted a conception of his relation
to the Father that the explicit declarations of the fourth gospel awaken no
surprise in the ordinary reader. In fact, the old assertion of the critics, that
the fourth gospel presents a very different personage from the Messiah of the
first three, is now, I believe, generally abandoned.
Indeed, how anyone who admits the exceptional character of Jesus, above
all recognizes in him the embodiment of the self-manifesting power of God,
can be stumbled by the statement that he (congruously enough) came into
the world in an exceptional way, I never have been able to understand.
On the genuineness of John my opinion remains unchanged. Many of
the embarrassments I think due to (or greatly aggravated by) misconception
as to the nature of the gospels in general, and of that one in particular, and
the consequent application to it of false historical requirements which it was
not intended to meet.

 

[SavedByGrace]

Like I said, no real evidence. False witness, probably originated by one bible "onlyist".

Here is from his own words, which count far more than suggestions by unnamed people.

was henry joseph thayer unitarian - Google Search

he writes to a pastor
desirous of reading up on the deity of Christ:
But in preparing to present from the pulpit any doctrine of the truth of
which I was thoroughly convinced (like the present doctrine), I have usually
found myself most helped by reading the ablest books on the other side. By
doing this, one not only best discovers what the actual difficulties of an
unbeliever are, but has suggested to him (often) the best methods of meeting
them.

And

"
JOSEPH HENRY THA YER 265
one who in wide erudition and advanced scholarship "knew it
all," and yet held fast to every vital point of the old faith.
Three passages from his letters will illustrate my meaning:

The really strong argument in support of Christ's pre-existence has
always seemed to me to be the concurrent, yet (at least as respects its form)
independent, representations of the biblical writers, not even excepting the
synoptists; for, although the first three gospels contain no explicit assertion
of the doctrine, the personage they portray forbids his classification with
ordinary men, and leaves so unique and exalted a conception of his relation
to the Father that the explicit declarations of the fourth gospel awaken no
surprise in the ordinary reader. In fact, the old assertion of the critics, that
the fourth gospel presents a very different personage from the Messiah of the
first three, is now, I believe, generally abandoned.
Indeed, how anyone who admits the exceptional character of Jesus, above
all recognizes in him the embodiment of the self-manifesting power of God,
can be stumbled by the statement that he (congruously enough) came into
the world in an exceptional way, I never have been able to understand.
On the genuineness of John my opinion remains unchanged. Many of
the embarrassments I think due to (or greatly aggravated by) misconception
as to the nature of the gospels in general, and of that one in particular, and
the consequent application to it of false historical requirements which it was
not intended to meet.
So we admire the man of learning, but we cling to the man
of faith. Above and beyond the scholar and the teacher, our
hearts go out to the humble Christian believer.
Thus we find him in his answer to a former pupil, now teach-
ing in a similar line, who wrote to him upon his resignation last
spring. In these few words which follow we see the man him-
self: how his life is bound up with the work he lays down, how
humbly he thinks of himself, how warmly he responds to affec-
tion, and above all how simply he trusts in the mercy of the Lord:
When your turn comes-may it be distant-you will know how com-
forting such expressions of affection and approval as you have sent me are
to a veteran. For in truth the end is sad. It gives one a little suggestion of
what it will be to die. It starts all those (self-deluded ?) thoughts of how
much more earnest and enterprising and noble one would make his life, if he
only had the chance to live it over again. But such compassionate judg-
ments as fellow-workers for truth can find it in their hearts to give stir the
hope in the condescending kindness of Him who accepts the weakest and
most desultory endeavors as though they were achievements. So from my
heart I thank you.

Why don't you check his Lexicon for yourself

 

[JonC]

the guiding by the Holy Spirit in ALL our daily lives is essential. When engaged in the vast subject of textual studies, with so many translations now available, and with different readings, it is here that we need to seek the Holy Spirit, as He alone leads us to the Truth.

I agree. I think that where we mostly disagree is in exactly what is "inspired". Where you lean towards the words themselves (which is probably the most common position and was the position of the seminary I attended) I lean towards what those words communicated (latitude, I suppose, in how the human authors expressed those words). And I cannot say that I would be consistent in my view (it is a leaning). But I do believe that divine inspiration transcends translation, partly because I also believe that so much of Scripture is missed due to "literal" methods of interpretation - not that the "literal meaning" is incorrect but that often what is being communicated is more significant (again, you can accuse me of inconsistency and that would be a fair accusation).

But we are all dependent on the work of the Spirit. I absolutely agree with you here.

 

[RighteousnessTemperance&]

Jerome was a great Bible textual scholar, not Augustine!

And yet your own comment is in the tradition of the latter. LOL.

 

[Conan]

Why don't you check his Lexicon for yourself

Lies do not make it so. First of it is his translation of someone elses Lexicon. Second the forward written is false, probably by Green. The first false witness of this was in "kingdom of the cults", which was incorrect. It is a plain fact that he was a Congregationalist, not a unitarian. You are passing on false information. I realize you don't mean any thing bad, but your sources are false.

 

[RighteousnessTemperance&]

One common misconception is that there is only one Septuagint.

• The fact is there are many different versions of the Greek OT
• Many (many, many) different authors translated what we now call the Septuagint (or LXX) and within each version there is a wide variety of translation methods.

"Ay, there's the rub." Wasn't Origen's Hexapla purportedly an attempt to compare Greek versions? He does not seem to have considered all of them to be LXX. Nor does Jerome

Beyond the tradition of 72 translators (forget for a moment the myth that they all translated the OT entire), did they think the LXX a hybrid of translations?

 

[RighteousnessTemperance&]

The point is, or should be, that credentials, even of a prophet, are not sufficient authority. Everything must be tested. Some experts may not like this, but everyone is subject to bias and logical fallacy in their views and arguments. This is a fundamental principle for those seeking truth.

The ONLY Fundamental principle for those who are seeking Bible Truth, is the Guiding of the Holy Spirit in all that we do. As He ALONE is able to teach us what Truth really is!

Do not twist the statement or its intent. That the Holy Spirit should prevail is paramount. But God is not stupid or irrational or illogical, nor is his Word. God is above man's abilities not below them.

And a man is not the Holy Spirit. Someone imagining or claiming that the Holy Spirit led him into falsehood is deceived, and should in no wise be believed. Anyone imagining such things do not happen is open to being grievously misled. No one engaging in argument is above being challenged on the merits of his argument.

 

[rlvaughn]

Joseph Henry Thayer served in the Congregational Church. Here is a journal article: Joseph Henry Thayer: The Man and His Work. Here is a relevant portion:

It is interesting to note that, while as a young man he usually attended Dr. Gannett's church (Unitarian) with his father, yet his own views followed those of his mother, and led him into the Congregational church. His experience thus resembled that of Phillips Brooks, and resulted in a large charity and understanding for those of differing beliefs, together with a firm and discriminating hold upon his own.

 

[SavedByGrace]

Do not twist the statement or its intent. That the Holy Spirit should prevail is paramount. But God is not stupid or irrational or illogical, nor is his Word. God is above man's abilities not below them.

And a man is not the Holy Spirit. Someone imagining or claiming that the Holy Spirit led him into falsehood is deceived, and should in no wise be believed. Anyone imagining such things do not happen is open to being grievously misled. No one engaging in argument is above being challenged on the merits of his argument.

When you understand textual studies we can have a better dialogue. Until then

 

[SavedByGrace]

Joseph Henry Thayer served in the Congregational Church. Here is a journal article: Joseph Henry Thayer: The Man and His Work. Here is a relevant portion:

People try to support the unsupportable

 

[RighteousnessTemperance&]

When you understand textual studies we can have a better dialogue. Until then

Your posts make that seem doubtful when they deny, ignore, or omit more basic requisites, including a basic comprehension of what is being said. But you aren't under obligation to reply to my posts.

 

[RighteousnessTemperance&]

... We get caught up on theologies that are often what Scripture is not communicating. We tend to ask questions to satisfy our curiosity. ...

Agree strongly. Human nature abhors a vacuum.

 

[rlvaughn]

People try to support the unsupportable

I don't own Thayer's Lexicon and don't own stock in Joseph Henry Thayer. I have nothing to "try" to support. It is historically demonstrable that he joined, pastored, and served within the Congregation Church. Whether or not he was heretical, not trinitarian, or whatever was none of my concern in the post I made. The other (about the Congregational Church) is an historical fact regardless of what anyone might think about him, good, bad, or indifferent.

 

[SavedByGrace]

Your posts make that seem doubtful when they deny, ignore, or omit more basic requisites, including a basic comprehension of what is being said. But you aren't under obligation to reply to my posts.

 

[SavedByGrace]

I don't own Thayer's Lexicon and don't own stock in Joseph Henry Thayer. I have nothing to "try" to support. It is historically demonstrable that he joined, pastored, and served within the Congregation Church. Whether or not he was heretical, not trinitarian, or whatever was none of my concern in the post I made. The other (about the Congregational Church) is an historical fact regardless of what anyone might think about him, good, bad, or indifferent.

My words were not addressed to you, but to those who still try to defend Thayer as non Unitarian, even though he was