From: Jack Kilmon (jkilmon@historian.net)
Date: Mon Jul 06 1998 - 01:29:58 EDT
CRAIG R HARMON wrote:
> >scholars that take NT exegesis a step further by transposing
> >the Semitic linguistic and cultural context behind the Greek often
> >come closer to the ipsa verba than those Graecists who
> >tendentiously cling to Greek exegesis alone.
> >Jack
> >jkilmon@historian.net
>
> That's an interesting statement. How do you know that they come closer to
> the ipsissima verba? It rather assumes that anyone knows what those are
> (unless, as I'm sure you're not) you mean the Greek text (which, let's face
> it, is all we have). Anything else is conjecture pure and simple. IMO.
I do not agree. The LXX is not compositional Greek. It is 100%
translational Greek. The NT is a combination of compositional Greek
with imbedments of translational Greek. The translational Greek retains,
in many cases, Semitic structures but often loses the Semitic idiom.
As a result, there are textual variants throughout the witnesses and
these variants often distill to one word when retroverted back to
Aramaic (NT) or compared to the MT. (LXX). To ignore this is to do only
half a job in exegesis.
--- B-Greek home page: http://sunsite.unc.edu/bgreek You are currently subscribed to b-greek as: [cwconrad@artsci.wustl.edu] To unsubscribe, forward this message to unsubscribe-b-greek@franklin.oit.unc.edu To subscribe, send a message to
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:39:53 EDT