Skip to comments.Searching for the Better Text: How errors crept into the Bible and what can be done to correct them
Posted on 04/23/2010 7:35:06 AM PDT by SunkenCiv
In some cases the traditional text is clearly superior, but in others the version in the scrolls is better.
Thanks to the scrolls, more and more textual problems in the Hebrew Bible are being resolved. The notes in newer Bible translations list variant readings from the scrolls, and in some cases, the translations incorporate these readings in the text as the preferred reading. No one has ever seriously suggested that the Dead Sea Scrolls contain anything like an eleventh commandment; but the scrolls do help clarify numerous difficult phrases in the Hebrew Bible, and for textual scholars that is more than enough...
We have three major traditions, or "witnesses," to the Hebrew Bible: the Masoretic text, the traditional Jewish text; the Septuagint, the Greek translation of the Hebrew Bible that became authoritative for Christianity; and the Samaritan Pentateuch, the text holy to the small offshoot of Judaism that still survives in two small communities in Israel and the West Bank...
The Samaritan Bible is limited to the Pentateuch, the Five Books of Moses. The most striking difference between the Samaritan Bible and the Jewish Bible is that the Samaritan Bible considers Mt. Gerizim, not Jerusalem, as God's holy place on earth.
(Excerpt) Read more at bib-arch.org ...
To all -- please ping me to other topics which are appropriate for the GGG list.
· Discover · Nat Geographic · Texas AM Anthro News · Yahoo Anthro & Archaeo · Google ·
· The Archaeology Channel · Excerpt, or Link only? · cgk's list of ping lists ·
Years ago, I found an old Bible (New Testament) in a barn.
It is an original 1856 or thereabouts “Translation of the New Testament” Syriac Peshito Version by James Murdock.
Basically, there are about 5 versions extant of the New Testament that are in Aramaic, the actual language he spoke.
It is more poetic and simpler than the KJ version or and others.
Kinda like the J6P bible!
Or you could learn Hebrew and read it as it was written in the language of their dreams.
Ping of interest.
The Scriptures (2009 edition)
A literal translation of the Tanakh/Old Testament based upon the Hebrew Masoretic Text, and the Messianic Writings/New Testament based on the Textus Receptus Greek Text, modifications to these being made as appropriate in the light of other vital sources. It restores the use of the Hebrew form of the Name of the Father, and also that of the Son, as well as Hebraic name-forms of persons and places throughout.
I think the study of how the text came to us is quite interesting.
Young’s literal translation:
Knoch’s Concordant version:
On the annual progression through Exodus this year I decided that the entire concept of "Ten Commandments" is bogus.
The phrase aseret hadvarim is what gets translated to "ten commandments." But it really means "ten words." Aseret hadvarim occurs only once in Exodus, and where it occurs is in no way associated with what most people think of when they think of the ten commandments. ("I am the L-rd, thy G-d," etc.) Instead it occurs when Moses gets a supposed "second set of ten commandments" quite different from the first set (Including things like "Every first issue of the womb is mine," at Ex 34:19). After these new commandments are given the text continues:
YHWH said to Moshe,This is mostly the translation of Ex 34:27-28 of Everett Fox who is considered by many to be the most faithful translator of Exodus. I have changed only one word in Fox's translation.
write you down these words:
For in accordance with these words
I cut with you a covenant, and with Israel.
Now he was there beside YHWH bread he did not eat
and water he did not drink,
but he wrote down on the tablets the words of the covenant, the fifteen words.
I would assert that plain meaning of these words is that the "covenant" that Moses (Moshe) wrote down was, "For in accordance with these words I cut with you a covenant, and with Israel." Fifteen words!
Of course the word in Fox's translation that I changed was his translation of aseret. Fox said "ten." I say "fifteen," but it is ten words IN HEBREW! (ki al pi hadevarim ha'eleh karati itcha brit ve'et Yisra'el.)
Covenant implies some sort of agreement which generally involves words, not commands. These are the words of the covenant, the fifteen words.
I read recently about the process of reproducing copies of biblical writings. The problem is the scribes who may or may not copy accurately. This source said that the scribes of Alexandria were much more meticulous and accurate than those of Byzantium. It was suggested that if there was a disagreement between words appearing in Alexandrian and Byzantine sources, the better bet was to go with Alexandria. Unfortunately, after Nicea, Alexandria lost much influence.
Better go to the sources, and apply higher criticism. A good introduction is this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Q_source about the Q source for the New Testament and the documentary hypothesis http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Documentary_Hypothesis for the Five Books of Moses.