The Book of Obadiah in the Septuagint

The Book of Obadiah, although short (it has only 21 verses; the shortest in the Hebrew Bible), is at the same time very difficult. The difficulties are manifested in its linguistic and textual layers, but above all in what concerns its content, theology and interpretation. The Greek translation of Obad contained in the LXX is particularly important because it represents a way of understanding the Book going back to pre-Christian, Hellenistic times, which strongly emphasised the theme of threats to Israel from other nations. In the Greek translation (LXXObad), the cursing character of the Book is radicalised and the guilt of the enemies (Edomites – Idumeans) is highlighted. The article presents the Book of Obadiah in its historical context (both the Hebrew original and the Greek version), and presents its text, content and character in the Septuagint version. It compares it with LXXJer 29 (LXX numbering) and shows how the challenging theology of the Book was understood among the Jews of Hellenistic Alexandria. The universalisation of the message of the Book by the LXX translation was later continued in its patristic and rabbinic interpretations.

The Cup or Qôs? Lost Prayer and Wordplay in Lamentations 4:21–22

The article discusses the reference to Edom at the end of Lam 4. It makes two proposals. First, it argues that we should understand nearly all of the clauses in Lam 4:21–22 as volitive expressions that convey the speaker’s wishes or prayers. Second, it argues that the Hebrew text of Lam 4:21 contains a wordplay lost in the ancient Greek translation and, thus, lost in the subsequent tradition. When Lam 4:21 uses the Hebrew word כּוֹס (“cup”) together with the syntagma עבר עַל in a context of irony and concerning “Daughter Edom,” כּוֹס alludes to Qôs (קוֹס), the patron god of the Edomites and the Idumaeans. The Septuagint understood the Hebrew text’s volitive expressions as ordinary indicatives. It “quenched” the Hebrew text’s ironic pun and made an unambiguous expression of what originally was ambiguous.

ІНФІНІТИВИ У ФУНКЦІЇ ВТОРИННОГО ПРЕДИКАТА У ТЕКСТІ БІОГРАФІЇ АРТАКСЕРКСА ПЛУТАРХА: ОСОБЛИВОСТІ ВІДТВОРЕННЯ У ПЕРЕКЛАДІ НОВОГРЕЦЬКОЮ МОВОЮ

In the article, infi nitives in the function of the secondary predicate, in particular, in the syntactic constructions Accusativus cum infi nitivo, Nominativus cum infi nitivo and in subordinate clauses with the conjunctions ὥστε and πρίν in the text of the biography of Artaxerxes by Plutarch are considered. In accordance with the purpose of the study, the descriptive method (for inventory, classifi cation and grammatical interpretation of infi nitives) and comparative analysis (for identifi cation of grammatical transformations of the ancient Greek infi nitive in New Greek translation and for assessment of their compliance with the original forms) were used. Elements of quantitative analysis have also been involved (to determine the main transformational means of translating infi nitives). The analysis has shown that the infi nitive as an non-fi nite form of the verb is rendered as a fi nite one, the most typical variant of translating the infi nitive in the construction Accusativus cum infi nitivo, in subordinate temporal clauses with the conjunction πρίν, and in the majority of clauses of result with the conjunction ώστε being conditional mood with the particle να (60 %). Infi nitives in the construction Nominativus cum infi nitivо and partly in subordinate clauses with the conjunction ώστε are usually translated by indicatives (35 %); in some cases the infi nitive is reproduced by descriptive expressions (5 %). Grammatical transformations are combined with lexical ones. In the translation, the same verb (15 %) as in Old Greek can be used, or it can be replaced by a synonymous verb (85 %) of New Greek due to the limited use of the corresponding Old Greek words in New Greek or their disappearance. Therefore, the absence of infi nitives in New Greek is represented in translation by other means and techniques, which have an equivalent semantic load and can adequately reproduce the meaning of a sentence with an infi nitive construction, and thus to render Plutarch’s literary passion for multifaceted action and information capacity of the text. Key words: Accusativus cum infi nitivo, Nominativus cum infi nitivo, subordinate clauses with conjunctions ὥστε and πρίν, translation, conditional mood with particle να, indicative mood, descriptive expression.

The Double Text of Jeremiah Revisited

From the time of the Church Fathers, it has been recognized that the Greek translation (LXX) of the book of Jeremiah is shorter than the received Hebrew text (MT). Modern assessments of this textual situation have viewed the LXX as between one-eighth and one-sixth shorter than the corresponding Masoretic text of the book of Jeremiah. Since manuscripts have been found at Qumran that seem to confirm the antiquity of the shorter LXX recension, many explanations for this editorial discrepancy have focused on the phenomenon of editorial expansion within the Masoretic tradition. This chapter presents a range of counter-evidence demonstrating that the LXX has been subjected to a sustained process of editorial concision.

Two Ancient Editions of the Book of Jeremiah

The book of Jeremiah has been handed down from antiquity in two separate editions that differ markedly from each other: MT and the Alexandrian version (JerAlT), which is represented by the original Greek translation (JerG*) and certain Qumran fragments. The Alexandrian edition is about one-seventh shorter than its Masoretic counterpart, and it deviates from JerMT both in its macro-structure and in some traits of its microstructure. A growing and well-founded consensus holds that the two editions derive from a common ancestor, with JerAlT still closely resembling this predecessor, whereas JerMT has been enlarged and restructured. This chapter characterizes the translation technique of JerG* and the value of that source as an access to its Hebrew Vorlage. Further, the essay discusses the most important reasons for the text-historical priority of the Alexandrian edition and the secondary nature of the Masoretic Sondergut (the material specific to the Masoretic edition), with the strongest probative force accorded to the pre-Masoretic idiolect, an extended set of linguistic properties distinguishing the Sondergut from the remainder of the book and, to a major part, from the entire rest of the Hebrew Bible. Finally, the chapter summarizes the particular features of the Sondergut, it reflects on the intention guiding the scribes who created this corpus, and concludes with an estimate of its date of origin.

Contested Theologies in the Book of Jeremiah

The book of Jeremiah testifies to disputes about theologies on various levels. Comparison of the Hebrew text and the version of the Septuagint shows large differences regarding the manner in which they speak of God. These differences suggest that the Greek translation tried to evade unusual, challenging, or provocative aspects attributed to God by mitigating or omitting them. The opposition between YHWH, with Jeremiah on his side, and the people together with their leaders shapes the main conflict within the book. The latter wish a “comfortable” relationship without liability, whereas God and his prophet require an exclusive liaison and determination. In some passages, Jeremiah has views which differ from those of YHWH. These texts illustrate that even a prophet has to “learn,” to open himself to God’s broader horizons and distinct plans. (d) Some features of the theological message of the book of Jeremiah are unique and set it apart from all other scrolls of the Bible. Jeremiah thus conveys a particular, independent view of YHWH, which sometimes stands in contrast to Deuteronomy, Isaiah, and other writings, although sharing the same belief in the one and only God. (e) The theological struggles within the book of Jeremiah find a continuation in the conflict of contemporary interpretations. Instead of explaining the various positions with diachronic considerations, it seems sounder to understand the rich variety of theologies therein as due to the different characters, altered situations and circumstances, and to the development of the individuals within the course of history.

‘If they Will Enter my Rest’: The Impact of the Greek Translation Technique of Psalm 95 for the Argument of Hebrews 3 and 4

Hebrews 4.3-5 introduces tension where the author cites Ps. 95.11b, ‘they will never enter into my rest’, then describes the available rest, and then quotes Ps. 95.11b again. The author appears to undercut the promise of rest by citing the prohibitive oath. This article argues that the tension in Heb. 4.3-5 can be dissolved by translating Ps. 95.11b not as an emphatic negative oath (‘they will never enter into my rest’) but as an open-ended conditional statement (‘if they will enter into my rest’). This is argued in the following way: first, the issue of an assumed Hebraism is explained. Second, three problems with the Hebraism solution are presented. Third, the Interlinear Paradigm of the New English Translation of the Septuagint (NETS) is introduced resulting in two further criticisms of the Hebraism translation. Last, the author’s argument in Heb. 4.3-5 is read with the meaning of the open-ended conditional.