Why read the Septuagint from cover to cover?

Pre-Christian fragments of the LXX

Last month we announced a two-year safari, reading through the Septuagint version of the Scriptures, from cover to cover!

Our friend David Baer (PhD from Cambridge, specialist in the Septuagint of Isaiah) has decided to join the group. He wanted to say a few words!

Why read the Septuagint? The whole Septuagint??!! Over two years??!! Are you nuts?

It’s not hard to imagine how such a project would be abandoned alongside the highway of our lives, a good idea that could never earn a space for itself among the daily priorities of busy lives.

Nevertheless, I’m in. I’m in because the reading of the Septuagint promises several benefits.

First, the student who has decided to study New Testament Greek has in fact only prepared himself to read a thin slice of the Jewish and Christian literature that comes to us in Greek. Those of us who’ve learned to read the New Testament in Greek have done a very fine thing. But we can’t really claim that we read Greek. Not yet.

Septuagint reading, precisely because it places on the table before us texts that are not as well known to us as the New Testament, is the very best way actually to learn Greek.

In the second place, the Septuagint was the form of the Bible that was best known to the first generations of Christians. Although it’s true that the difference between the Masoretic Hebrew texts and those of the Septuagint are hardly massive, it should not be denied that those differences do exist. Reading the Septuagint puts us in the shoes of the earliest Christians, spiritual family members of ours who knew the Scripture principally in Greek dress.

Third, reading the Septuagint is an open door that welcomes us into first-hand contact with the challenges that keep textual critics busy. This kind of reading confronts us with difficult decisions about the complex relationship that exists between texts that share a common origin but have come to be different from each other through the reverent reading to which both Jews and Christians have subjected them.

Finally, reading the Septuagint is fun! It’s even more so when a cohort of friends—or perhaps readers who will over time become friends—take up together the intellectual challenge of reading ancient texts slowly, for this is the pace at which we will inevitably read.

So let’s read the Septuagint! Let’s bend our shoulders to the plough together with our spiritual ancestors, whose hands and eyes fell upon Greek texts that they fully considered to be the Word of God.

Our Goal: A two-year excursion through the Septuagint, including the Deuterocanonical books, from January 1, 2019 through the close of 2020.

For more information read the DESCRIPTION HERE

To Join, go to Facebook: our page is under the name Septuagint2years or Septuagint in 2019-2020, go to the page and click LIKE in order to join.

“Why read the Septuagint from cover to cover?,” by Gary S. Shogren and David Baer

Advertisements

Facebook Reading Club! – the Septuagint over Two Years

Our Goal: A two-year excursion through the Septuagint, including the Deuterocanonical books, from January 1, 2019 through the close of 2020. We will offer weekly reading plans that will average about a chapter and a half per day; for example, the week of January 1-6 we will read Genesis 1-12 LXX. The Psalms will be interspersed throughout the year, and we will have regular “Catch-Up” times. While en route, we will also take side excursions: reading Sinaiticus on its website, some Septuagint texts from the DSS, the Hexapla, the Theodotion version of Daniel, and the Fayyum fragments.

Why? Two excellent reasons. The best way to expand one’s knowledge of biblical Greek is to read the Septuagint. And the Septuagint was the Bible of the apostolic church.

Why Now? This group was sparked by the publication in November 2018 of Septuaginta: A Reader’s Edition, by Lanier and Ross. (http://evangelicaltextualcriticism.blogspot.com/2018/08/new-readers-lxx-on-sale.html)

This edition of Rahlfs-Hanhart footnotes the lexemes which appear 100 times or less, beginning with ἀόρατος in Gen 1:2: the earth was “invisible, without form.” The list price is $109.95, but it is now discounted on Amazon for $87.96. it is highly recommended for participants in this group! (There is no Spanish equivalent edition).

How Much Greek Do I Need in order to Participate? The difficulty level of the LXX is not high, especially for people who have dominated the Greek of the New Testament. Nevertheless, the sheer quantity of text – over 1100 chapters! – means that we will be covering about a chapter and a half per every day. Even for the intermediate or advanced reader, that might require a half-hour daily. This is all to say that, reading the entire LXX and committing this much time for two entire years will be demanding. Let us count the cost!

To Join, go to Facebook: our page is under the name Septuagint2years or Septuagint in 2019-2020, go to the page and click LIKE in order to join.

Reading Plan – the Full Septuagint in 2 Years

“Facebook Reading Club! – the Septuagint over Two Years,” by Gary S. Shogren, Seminario ESEPA, San José, Costa Rica

Me, a hater of the King James Bible? Who in the world told you that?!

There are Christians who are King James people because they prefer the wonderful language and cadence of the KJV, or who believe (with little evidence, but no matter for now) that it best represents the original Greek text. Overall, with these brothers and sisters, I have no serious quarrel.

But when someone condemns my Bible as a tool of Satan, or suggests that I think the same about their Bible, then I must speak up.

Here we are talking about those who pose the leading question: “Why do people hate the KJV Bible?” This is a “straw man,” attributing a position to someone that they themselves have not expressed. So rather than demonstrate that people hate the King James, they simply claim that it is so. The underlying assumption seems to be: unless you are KING JAMES 4EVER!, then the only possible explanation is that you must be KING JAMES NEVER! And that by extension, if you hate the KJV, then you must hate the Bible. (more…)

Thoughts on Hebrew and Greek from a Scholar: Will Varner

Thanks to Dr. Will Varner for this article, to which I here post a link. It’s a topic that interests me, but once in a while I come across an article and have to conclude, “This person expresses it so much better than I could, so I’ll just link to their article!”

DO WE NEED TO GET INSIDE THE HEBREW MINDS OF THE NT AUTHORS?

I also recommend my own series that starts with my essay: “But the Greek REALLY says…”: Why Hebrew and Greek are not needed in the pulpit, Part 1

Yeshua? Iesous? Jesus? Some other form? Who’s right?

The reader may download the entire article as a pdf file, especially given the presence of long technical footnotes׃ Shogren_Yeshua Iesous Jesus Some other form Who’s right. The results from the TLG search, mentioned in the article, may be downloaded here: Ιησους in TLG first 1000 references

The headlines are usually IN BOLD PRINT!! With lots of COLOR!!!

names

Having studied the matter, I believe that the Hebrew name for Jesus is Yeshua, but here I’m talking about the extremists. For example, “Satan has had 2000 years of infiltrating the Church, and look at it, full of every sin and evil imaginable and all under the name of Jesus.”[1] The most extreme blog I have found includes this rant: in Spanish it goes on about how those who use the name Jesus instead of Yeshuaʿ are (supposedly) responsible for the Inquisition, the papacy, Satanism, Christian rock music (!), charging people money to go to heaven. Oh, and they are the ones responsible for killing 6.5 million Jews in the Holocaust.[2]

Spanish rant on JesusSo far, the most extreme rant I have found

“Ah,” we hear, “but we must explore the Jewish roots in order to appreciate the gospel!” And of course this is true: I myself spent some years learning how to read Hebrew, and this year I am reading the daily Parashah (the Torah in a year) in Hebrew with a group of friends. I teach our graduate-level course on Jewish backgrounds of the New Testament. I read the Mishnah, the Dead Sea Scrolls. All to say that I do appreciate, I think, the Jewish background of the faith.

No, what I am talking about here is the kind of people who blog and YouTube about Hebrew Roots and Sacred Names but who themselves know a little Hebrew at best, relying on others’ comments or the Strong’s Concordance for their information, people who must resort to copying and pasting Hebrew and Greek words from other sources.[3]

The premise of their argument, with some variations, is:

  1. “It is impossible to ‘translate’ a name from one language to another. Therefore, the Savior’s name has to remain in its Hebrew form.”
  2. “The name Iesous (the Greek form of the name of Yeshuaʿ) did not even exist before the crucifixion; it was invented by the Romans (or the Jews. Or the Catholic Church. Or Constantine[4])!”
  3. Iesous is a pagan Greek name.”
  4. Iesous has nothing to do etymologically with the Hebrew name Yeshuaʿ.”
  5. “Yeshuaʿ has a meaning in Hebrew, but Iesous does not mean anything in Greek.”
  6. Iesous was fabricated by an enemy of the faith and means ‘Behold the horse!’ Or maybe ‘a pig’ or ‘Hail, Zeus’ or some such thing.”
  7. “The use of Iesous or Jesus or other forms is a plot by the Vatican to blaspheme God and the Savior. If you use that form, you have fallen into their trap and are apostate.”
  8. “Greek or Latin names are by definition polluted with paganism; therefore, the Lord could not have the name Iesous.”
  9. “If you claim to follow Jesus, then you cannot be saved, because there is ‘no other name by which we can be saved’ except for Yeshuaʿ.”

This line of thinking is rife with historical and linguistic errors, and is logically self-contradictory. It fails to explain how the name Iesous could be applied over 1270 times to the Lord in the New Testament, let alone in all the literature of the early church, without a single exception. Let’s take these arguments one by one

1. “It is impossible to ‘translate’ a name from one language to another.” FALSE!

The example that always come up is, “George Bush is George Bush all around the world! You wouldn’t say ‘Jorge Bush,’ because names cannot change!” Well, let’s retire this claim from the outset: two minutes with Google reveals that George H. W. Bush is sometimes called Jorge in Spanish,[5] Giorgio in Italian,[6] and with the French form Georges, as in this article.[7]

Georges

In fact, names can change from one language to another. We could multiply examples: Why do the Italians call the king of France Luigi XIV, but the Spaniards say he is Luis XIV? Why don’t they say Louis XIV, like the French do? In English why do they say Christopher Columbus; in Spanish Cristóbal Colón? Why don’t they say it the right, Italian, way, Cristoforo Colombo? (more…)

Thoughts on Greek from a Scholar: F. F. Bruce

(Thanks to Paul D. Adams of for bringing this to my attention! Check out Paul’s blog at http: http://inchristus.com/. I also recommend the series that starts with my essay: “But the Greek REALLY says…”: Why Hebrew and Greek are not needed in the pulpit, Part 1)

F. F. Bruce was the prime mover of the renaissance of evangelical New Testament study in the English-speaking world that began after the Second World War and continues to today. He was also known as a humble man, who loved God’s people.

31XL7-2HQzL._UX250_

“I have met students who claimed to ‘know Greek’ on the basis of their acquaintance with the Greek New Testament; even if that latter acquaintance were exhaustive, it would no more amount to a knowledge of Greek than an acquaintance with the English New Testament could amount to a knowledge of English.

There is a story told of A.S. Peake writing a Greek word on the blackboard of his Manchester classroom, and one of his students saying, ‘You needn’t write it down, Doctor; we know Greek.’ To which he replied, ‘I wish I did.’

To know a language, even an ancient language, involves having such a feeling for its usage that one can tell, almost as by instinct, whether a construction is permissible or not, or whether a translation is possible or not.

Translation is not simply a matter of looking up a word in a dictionary and selecting the equivalent which one would like to find in a particular passage.

It is this manifest mastery of Greek usage which makes William Kelly’s New Testament commentaries, especially those on Paul’s epistles, so valuable. ‘And you know what is restraining him now,’ says the RSV of 2 Thessalonians 2:6, following some earlier interpreters. This construing of ‘now’ with ‘what is restraining’ Kelly describes as a solecism, pointing out that the ‘now’ is ‘simply resumptive’.[1] Kelly is right. But how did he discover that the construction of the adverb with ‘what is restraining’ is a solecism? No grammar-book or dictionary would tell him that; it was his wide and accurate acquaintance with Greek usage that made it plain to him, an acquaintance which is the fruit of long and patient study.” (F. F. Bruce, In Retrospect: Remembrance of things past, p. 293)

See further Bruce quotes at http://ntresources.com/blog/?p=1685

See also Women in Ministry according to F. F. Bruce

NOTES:

[1] That is, Bruce agrees with Kelly, that 2 Thess 2:6 should be translated as “And, now [or as it is], you know what is restraining him.” Bruce and Kelly think that the RSV version “what is restraining him now” is a solecism, that is, a mistranslation. I happen to agree with Bruce and Kelly on this point, see my commentary on 1 Thessalonians.

 

The Eclectic Text of the New Testament – a conspiracy against the Word?

God’s beloved Word – you’d better believe I study it daily. Yes, as a Bible teacher, since my ministry is teaching the New Testament in Spanish and English, and also from the Greek. But more fundamentally I read the Bible simply as a Christian, because it is through the reading, meditation, and obedience of God’s Word that we grow as believers. [1]

Therefore it concerns me when I read about a supposed conspiracy, made up of people who secretly despise God’s Word and are paving the way for antichrist, out to destroy the Bible and leave us in spiritual darkness. These charges are leveled against the Nestle-Aland edition of the Greek New Testament, the exact same “critical” edition I and my students read and interpret. [2]

That’s why I am impelled to read up on the so-called Alexandrian Conspiracy to ruin the Bible. If it is a real and present danger, I want to know. If it is a false alarm, then I must communicate that to you, the readers.

“Don’t destroy God’s Word! Or change it!”

My conclusion:

If the critical edition of the New Testament be treason against God’s Holy Word, then it’s the most poorly executed conspiracy in the history of Bible study.

Let’s see why. One extreme theory has it (more…)

Published in: on October 9, 2014 at 2:37 pm  Comments (20)  
Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,

“But the Greek REALLY says…” Why Greek and Hebrew are not needed in the pulpit, Part 3

In Part 1 and Part 2 I offered one individual’s philosophy of Expository Preaching without Ancient Words:

  • I use the biblical languages, virtually daily. [1]
  • I cannot remember the last time I did not study the Hebrew or Greek when I was preparing a sermon.
  • I cannot remember the last time I did use a Hebrew or Greek word when I was preaching a sermon.
  • The better I study the original text, the easier I find it is to explain its meaning in plain English/Spanish.
Preaching: an open Book, not a sealed scroll

Preaching: an open Book, not a sealed scroll

The exception is that when I give devotionals to my own Greek students, I will often show how a knowledge of the original languages is helpful. But now let’s focus on the positive, and think of times when it is illuminating to mention the Hebrew or Greek while preaching to a “regular” church audience.

The following list might make a start:

HEBREW WORDS:

  • Shema confession in its entirety from Deut 6:4, including the meaning of “one” (echad) as unity, not singularity (more…)

“But the Greek REALLY says…”: Why Hebrew and Greek are not needed in the pulpit, Part 2

“…Okay, wait, so then, hah, hah, so then the second guy says to the first one, ἐκεινος οὐκ ἐστιν ὁ κυῶν μου!! Oh, that one gets me every time!"

“…Okay, wait, so then, hah, hah, so then the second guy says to the first one, ἐκεινος οὐκ ἐστιν ὁ κυῶν μου!! Oh, mercy, that one gets me every time!”

In Part 1, I argued in favor of a sharply minimalist use of ancient Hebrew and Greek words during a sermon, especially if there is no compelling purpose or, worse, if the goal is to impress the crowd: it is a pitiable housepainter who departs the job with his scaffolding still up, hoping you’ll notice how far he had to climb. See “But the Greek REALLY says…”: Why Hebrew and Greek are not needed in the pulpit, Part 1 and Part 3.

Now, I believe an interpreter of the Word should invest the time necessary to work through it in the original, just as you would learn Spanish if you were going to teach Don Quixote, week in and week out, for the rest of your life. However, in our sermons we should avoid Hebrewfying and Greekitizing, simply because it is rarely of help.

Now we will explore some issues with the Greek language (more…)

Published in: on June 29, 2013 at 11:15 am  Comments (22)  
Tags: , , , , , , , ,

“But the Greek REALLY says…”: Why Hebrew and Greek are not needed in the pulpit, Part 1

Para la versión castellana, vaya AQUI.

Come with me to ESEPA Seminary in Costa Rica: we meet at night around a table, and with me are all my advanced students of Greek. Throughout four semesters we have studied the ancient dialect, koinē, and they have found blessings as they read the New Testament in the original.

Tonight we’ll take a different tack: “I’m about to impart something very important to you,” I alert them. Nodding, they lean forward.

“Here’s the mystical wisdom: (1) With almost no exceptions, whenever I preach, I study  deeply the passage in the original language. But, (2) I almost never mention a Greek or Hebrew word from the pulpit. In fact, I go for years without making a peep in those languages.”

I let that sink in.

Then: “If you cannot state in plain, precise Spanish what you have found in the text, then you don’t really understand the passage and you shouldn’t be preaching on it.” (more…)