Latest in the Bulletin of the International Organization for Septuagint and Cognate Studies (Vol 38)

The latest Bulletin of the International Organization for Septuagint and Cognate Studies (Vol. 38, 2005) is out (I actually received the volume a while back, but have not had a chance to finish the post). This is an excellent issue, with many excellent articles for those interested in Septuagint studies as well as translation theory and biblical studies. Wevers’s article is worth a read, if only for his engaging account of this work on the Göttingen Pentateuch volumes.

In addition, those interested in translation theory will want to read the articles by Aiken and Boyd-Taylor. Aitken has a very good summary of functional translation theory, while Boyd-Taylor has an interesting discussion of Descriptive Translation Studies (DTS). Both of these approaches offer more nuance than the typical discussions of “formal” versus “dynamic” translation theories based on Chomsky’s generative-transformative theory.

At any rate, here is the contents, with brief abstracts:

  • John William Wevers, “The Dead Sea Scrolls and the Septuagint,â€? pp. 1-24.
    Wevers provides a collation of Qumran Pentateuch LXX documents (Rahlfs MSS 805, 801, 802, 803) and then contextualizes his evaluation of their significance in light of current text critical practices, beginning with Lagarde and ending with reflections on his own (fascinating) experience preparing the Göttingen Pentateuch volumes. He concludes that while the Qumran Greek texts of the Pentateuch are not significant text-critically, the Hebrew MSS from Qumran are truly significant.
  • Petra Verwijs, “The Septuagint in the Peshitta and Syr.-Hexpla Translations of Amos 1:3-2:16,â€? pp. 25-40.
    Verwijs examines the character and role of the LXX as reflected in the Syriac translations of the Peshitta and the Syr.-Hexpla, using Amos 1:3-2:16 as an example. After a thorough study of the texts and their translation technique, Verwijs concludes that the communities that produced the Peshitta and the Syr.-Hexapla employed the LXX, though in the case of the Peshitta the reflection of the LXX may be due to the translator’s recollection rather than access to an actual text.
  • Claude Cox, “Tying It All Together: The Use of Particles in Old Greek Job,â€? pp. 41-54.
    Cox describes the use of coordinating conjugations in OG Job. While Hebrew has relatively few sentence or clause connectors, Greek has many, and Cox finds that the OG translator incorporates many more coordinating conjunctions in his translation, particularly γάÏ? and δέ. This frequent use of coordinating conjunctions brings the text together into brief sections or paragraphs in a way that is not apparent in its Hebrew Vorlage.
  • James K. Aitken, “Rhetoric and Poetry in Greek Ecclesiastes,â€? pp. 55-77.
    While the OG translation of Ecclesiastes is characterized by a high degree of formal equivalence, Aitken underscores the presence of a number of rhetorical features in the translation, including variatio, polytoton, anaphora, parechesis, assonance, isocola, and homoeoteleuton. Thus, the translator was not “slavishly literal� but employed features consistent with Greek rhetorical style in order to produce a text that is both faithful to its Hebrew Vorlage and engaging for its Greek readers. Aitken concludes with a brief discussion of the merit of a functional translation theory that takes into consideration the type of text that is being translated, over against the generative-transformative model. Thus, LXX-Ecclesiastes may be better described as an “informative-expressive� translation than simply “literal.�
  • Cameron Boyd-Taylor, “Calque-culations — Loan Words and the Lexicon,â€? pp. 79-99.
    Boyd-Taylor brings the Descriptive Translation Studies (DTS) of Gideon Toury to bear on the study of semantic borrowing and calques in the Septuagint. DTS understands the act of translation as a product of and for the target audience in which the some aspects of the source text are invariably retained for a variety of reasons. Seen in this light, stereotyped equivalents are examples of habitual lexical interference or transfer. The calque, on the other hand, “presupposes the institutionalization of a stereotype, such that the transfer of function from the source item to its counterpart… becomes itself a convention of the target language� (pp. 84-85). To illustrate his discussion, Boyd-Taylor examines the usage of κοίτη to refer to sexual relations and concludes that it may plausibly be a calque in some configurations. All in all, he concludes that identifying calques “is a precarious business� (p. 99) and many so-called calques should be reexamined.
  • Takamitsu Muraoka, “Gleanings of a Septuagint Lexicographer,â€? pp. 101-108.
    Muraoka briefly reflects on the influence of Semitisms and textual criticism on LXX Lexicography. In regards to the former, he discusses three examples of lexical Semitisms in the LXX: ἀγχιστεÏ?ω “to do a kinsman’s office,â€? θυμόϛ “breath, venom,â€? and á½?μοιόω “to consent, to concur.â€? In regards to the latter, while it was policy to base A Greek-English Lexicon of the Septuagint on the Göttingen LXX editions, Muraoka departed from this policy on occasion (one example he discusses is Num 11:13).

Latest in the Dead Sea Discoveries (14:1)

The latest volume of Dead Sea Discoveries (Volume 14, Issue 1) is out. There are a number of interesting articles in it, including the one by Barzilai. The contents are as follows:

  • Barzilai, Gabriel. “Incidental Biblical Exegesis in the Qumran Scrolls and Its Importance for the Study of the Second Temple Periodâ€? (pp. 1-24).
  • Broshi, Magen. “Essenes at Qumran? A Rejoinder to Albert Baumgartenâ€? (pp. 25-33).
  • Duke, Robert. “Moses’ Hebrew Name: The Evidence of the Vision of Amramâ€? (pp. 34-48).
  • Goldenberg, David. “Babatha, Rabbi Levi and Theodosius: Black Coins in Late Antiquityâ€? (pp. 49- 60).
  • Kister, Menahem. “The Development of the Early Recensions of the Damascus Documentâ€? (pp. 61-76).
  • van der Plicht, Johannes. “Radiocarbon Dating and the Dead Sea Scrolls: A Comment on ‘Redating’â€? (pp. 77-89).
  • Gzella, Holger. “The Use of the Participle in the Hebrew Bar Kosiba Letters in the Light of Aramaicâ€? (pp. 90-98).
  • Høgenhaven, Jesper. “The Literary Character of 4QTanhumimâ€? (pp. 99-124).

Christmas Dinner Was A Success

Well, Christmas Day has come and gone and everything went quite well — if I do say so myself. Christmas morning we spend alone, just my wife and the kids. The first thing we do after the kids wake us up at a reasonable time is read the Christmas Story from Luke and Matthew together and pray. Then we open stockings together. After that we had breakfast (I made French Toast). Then I had to get the turkey in the oven for supper — and it was only after that that we opened presents (yes, we’re cruel parents — we make our kids wait to open presents!).

As I mentioned in a previous post, I had pretty much my entire family over for dinner. The turkey turned out perfect as did the rest of the fixin’s. I made a cranberry apple stuffing out of three types of bread and even included turkey sausage — it was quite nummy. I made fresh cranberry sauce, though I forgot to get the candied ginger this year (Doh!), so it was plain. I whipped my garlic mashed potatoes until they melted in you mouth. Besides the standard cooked carrots, I also made some garlic fried green beans with mushrooms, onions, and slivered almonds. For dessert I had made three types of pie: pumpkin, apple, and cranberry apple.

All in all it was a great time with family. I enjoy putting on a spread like this for family and friends.

I trust you and yours also had a great Christmas and/or Hanukkah.


Christmas According to John, Part 2

[Merry Christmas everyone! This is the second part of a Christmas sermon presented here with only minor editing. The first post may be found here]

John’s Metaphysical Manger (John 1)

The second passage I want to direct our attention to helps us understand some of the theological implications of the birth of Jesus. The passage I am referring to is chapter one of John’s gospel. In this highly metaphysical and philosophical passage the significance of the birth of Christ is interpreted theologically.

1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 He was in the beginning with God. 3 All things came into being through him, and without him not one thing came into being. What has come into being 4 in him was life, and the life was the light of all people. 5 The light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not overcome it.

14 And the Word became flesh and lived [tabernacled] among us, and we have seen his glory, the glory as of a father’s only son, full of grace and truth. 15 (John testified to him and cried out, “This was he of whom I said, ‘He who comes after me ranks ahead of me because he was before me.’ �) 16 From his fullness we have all received, grace upon grace. 17 The law indeed was given through Moses; grace and truth came through Jesus Christ. 18 No one has ever seen God. It is God the only Son, who is close to the Father’s heart, who has made him known.

The Mystery of Christmas: The Incarnation

This passage tells us a number of things about that baby in a manger. In particular it tells us something about the divintiy of the Word and the ministry of the Word.

“In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God.â€? John tells that the baby in the manger is divine; God made human, God incarnate. John’s Christmas account revels in the mystery of the incarnation. The word “incarnation” and the adjective “incarnate” come from the Latin in carne “in flesh.â€? Note the progression: In the beginning was the Word, and the word was with God, and the word was God. Note that John says not that “God was the wordâ€?, but that “the word was God.â€? John is not saying that the Word is “a god,â€? as though the Word was a lesser god alongside the supreme God; nor is John saying that the Word was simply “divine,â€? nor does John say that the Word did god-like things without possessing the divine nature; rather John is saying that the Word is God in his very nature, yet without exhausting the being of God. The baby in a manger was fully human and fully God. He was God incarnate: “the Word became flesh and dwelled among us.â€?

The divine nature of the Word is seen in his activity in creation (vv. 1–5), revelation (vv. 5, 9–12, 18) and redemption (vv. 12–14, 16–17); in all these God expresses himself through the Word. The baby in the manger, the Word made flesh, was with God at the beginning and all things came into existence through him. The Word also reveals God to us. Paul says that Jesus is “the image of the invisible God” (Col 1:15). Both the deity and the humanity of Jesus are fundamental to his saving work. It’s because Jesus is God the Son – the Word made flesh – that we can know God, it’s because Jesus is God made human, that we can understand his death as the supreme evidence of God’s love for us.

There is more to Christmas than our minds can comprehend… when we come to Christmas, when we look upon that baby in a manger we are looking upon God incarnate. We are looking upon a mystery. There’s More to Christmas than Meets the Mind.

The Paradox of Divine Condescension

And this is the mystery of Christmas. Here you have the paradox of divine condescension; the mystery of God accommodating Godself, God becoming human.

At root, to save us God came not in his full glory as God but rather as a human; God came as a baby crying in his mother’s arms, a baby that required feeding and changing, a baby that was entirely and hopelessly dependent on others. God hid his glory, he limited himself. Remaining one with and equal to God he took the form of a slave. By becoming one with us, he was able to share our sorrows, bear our burdens, and ultimately die a criminal’s death and atone for our sins and unite us to God.

That is the real meaning of Christmas, and it’s my prayer for all of us — as we get together with friends and family, as we eat turkeys and hams, as we do all these good things — it’s my prayer that we would also realize that there is much more to Christmas than meets the eye and that the miracle of Christmas is not how much turkey you can eat, but it is that God so loved the world that he was willing to take on human flesh and enter this world as a helpless baby… a helpless baby that would one day die a criminal’s death on behalf of us all.

Amen.