Jonna Schmidt Posted September 5, 2015 Share Posted September 5, 2015 Hi I do not know Hebrew -- and I have been doing my best to understand Psalm 40:6 (my EARS you have opened) which is translated in Hebrews 10:5 as " a BODY You have Prepared for Me". So, I wanted to search for Key Word H0241 and I wanted to limit my results to the EAR. Instead, I received results such as HEARING How can I do a search which eliminates these extraneous results? Thank you for your input Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Λύχνις Δαν Posted September 5, 2015 Share Posted September 5, 2015 Hi Jonna, [KEY H0241] @"=ear" should do it. I ran it on ESVS and Psa 40:6 is included. Thx D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lester P. Bagley Posted September 6, 2015 Share Posted September 6, 2015 Hi Jonna, I presume that you caught that the Hebrews quote is from the LXX. So it's a whole new study of their choice of wording. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Λύχνις Δαν Posted September 6, 2015 Share Posted September 6, 2015 Hey Lester, I had a look and it's rather interesting. It would appear this comes from a difference in the LXX readings. Rahlfs for example renders the Psa as ὠτία while the Sinaiticus renders it σωμα. The HMT has : אָ֭זְנַיִם (ear in the dual according to the tagging). I don't know if variant readings exist here in the Hebrew that might have led to variant Old Greek though. So going to the Hebrews in the NT Greek. This Sinaiticus : Heb. 10:5 (Sin. 10:5) διο ειϲερχομενοϲ ειϲ τον κοϲμον λεγει θυϲιαν και προϲφοραν ουκ ηθεληϲαϲ ϲωμα δε κατηρτιϲω μοι but all the NT Greek I have uses σωμα. Interesting .... Thx D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Douglas Fyfe Posted September 7, 2015 Share Posted September 7, 2015 Daniel - not sure if i've understood you right, but you do know ϲωμα and σωμα are the same yeah? Sinaiticus uses uncials, c is how they write a sigma. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Λύχνις Δαν Posted September 7, 2015 Share Posted September 7, 2015 Yeah - I guess I wasn't clear - ooops. ωτια versus σωμα I guess the use of "but" is confusing. What I should have said was "but then all the NT Greek I have ...." intending to highlight the contrast between the NT use of σωμα (in either form) and the use of ωτια in Rahlfs and אָ֭זְנַיִם in the Hebrew. Thx D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Susan Posted September 7, 2015 Share Posted September 7, 2015 For anybody interested in the LXX textual issue here and how it affects the appropriation of the passage in Hebrews 10.... Karen Jobes made the interesting argument that the reading ὠτία is original (with Rahlfs editio minor + Göttingen, retroverting from the Hebrew) and σῶμα was introduced by the author of Hebrews for rhetorical effect. (I’m sure there are good arguments for σῶμα as well - most Hebrews commentaries seem to assume this, and as far as I know all LXX manuscript evidence supports it - but I happened to run across this paper recently and enjoyed it.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
accord Posted September 7, 2015 Share Posted September 7, 2015 For anybody interested in the LXX textual issue here and how it affects the appropriation of the passage in Hebrews 10.... Karen Jobes made the interesting argument that the reading ὠτία is original (with Rahlfs editio minor + Göttingen, retroverting from the Hebrew) and σῶμα was introduced by the author of Hebrews for rhetorical effect. (I’m sure there are good arguments for σῶμα as well - most Hebrews commentaries seem to assume this, and as far as I know all LXX manuscript evidence supports it - but I happened to run across this paper recently and enjoyed it.) Thank you Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.png.c3123c857d1029f98e39c9394adc358d.png)
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now