Yet another Septuagint manuscript using the divine name found (page 2)

DeWandelaar

@slimboy... I do not know if you read my reply about the septuagint? The septuagint is no more then a greek translation of the old testament. We already know that in the old testament the name of God was being used. As for the use of Kurios in the NEW testament: they have given themselves permission to change Kurios into the godsname in every sentence the word is being used unless it does not fit their teachings...

slimboyfat

Well Phizzy, all the Jewish copies of the Septuagint have the divine name and all the Christian copies have kurios (or ku), so the reasonable conclusion is that it was Christians who started the substitution. Trobisch argues it was done at the time when the NT canon was fixed mid-second century.

sosoconfused

I am not being funny or anything, but I really want to know why this is so important

slimboyfat

It's the one thing JWs may have got right in the last 150 years and they got there before anyone else.

OnTheWayOut

Still on topic- why is it "the divine name" ? Why not just say "YHWH" or "tetragramaton" ?

Using certain terms seems to me to assume that it is a given that this particular god exists and is indeed divine.

dropoffyourkeylee

SlimBoy, thanks for pointing out this website.

Actually, there are two posts by Prof Larry Hurtato in the last few days:

http://larryhurtado.wordpress.com/2013/07/02/new-oxyrhynchus-manuscripts/

http://larryhurtado.wordpress.com/2013/07/03/the-divine-name-and-greek-translation/

The articles and the followup questions and answers are really interesting.

jwfacts

all the Jewish copies of the Septuagint have the divine name and all the Christian copies have kurios (or ku), so the reasonable conclusion is that it was Christians who started the substitution.

I read it the other way around.

Hurtado argues that the use of the definite article before the divine name indicates that the manuscript relies on earlier copies that used Lord (kurios),

The substitution is the putting of YHWH back into the Septuagint. So it is the Jews doing the substitution here. If the Jewish copies were not the substitutions, then there would not be the definite article, according to Hurtado.

Do you have any reference to support that all Jewish copies have YHWH and Christian copies have Lord?

Sayswho

If there is only one true God then he would not need a personal name...only the imposters would. I do not call my father by his first name because the term farther is more personal.

However If his name is so important we would not have to be guessing what it is or how it is pronounced.

So again it is his inability to communicate with humans. Like the bible says humans will grope about searching---sounds sadistic to me!

SW (thinking out loud)

Jeffro

Use of the term "the divine name" suggests superstition about supposed names of the deity of Abrahamic religions. Did I accidently wake up in the wrong millenium?

slimboyfat

OnTheWayOut, I say divine name simply because it covers both YHWH and IAO forms, whereas Tetragrammaton only properly refers to YHWH. I find myself to be agnostic tending toward atheist, so my use of the term is not meant to convey a personal view of its sacred significance.

Indeed dropoff, Hurtado's blog is well worth following, despite the fact I disagree with almost every position he takes!

jwfacts, yeah Kahle that the Watchtower quotes all the time for a start, plus Howard, Tov, Trobisch, Skehan and so on, probably the majority of scholars who have expressed a view on the subject in fact.

Yet another Septuagint manuscript using the divine name found

Share this