Oct 02, 2013 Part 2 is Hebrew to Greek. The numbers next to the Greek words above are a key to the Hatch-Redpath Concordance that Muraoka mentions. That concordance (published early in the 20th century), has all the Greek words used in the Septuagint, together with what was thought to be the underlying Hebrew. The back of the HR concordance has a list that. It preserves the word order of the Septuagint, and aligns the Hebrew with that (PAHAGT preserves Hebrew word order) It has a much cleaner display, without the irritating vertical lines. It has morphology in both Greek and Hebrew (PAHAGT has no morphology at all) - including Hebrew roots. It has Bible Facts, Senses and Hebrew Strong's tagging. The first step in this process is to translate the Greek words of the New Testament into Hebrew. While translating the Greek words into Hebrew, may sound overwhelming for many, it is in fact, a very simple process that anyone can perform, even without any prior studies in Greek or Hebrew. All that is required is a Strong's Concordance and this.
The Hebrew Masoretic Text and the Greek Septuagint
In Romans 3:1 & 2, God’s word tells us that the Jews were committed to the oracles of God. The Jews were given charge of keeping and copying God’s word. That is why twice in the Old Testament they were instructed not to add to or take away from the Word of God.
• “Ye shall not add unto the word which I command you, neither shall ye diminish ought from it, that ye may keep the commandments of the LORD your God which I command you.” Deut. 4:2
![Hebrew Hebrew](/uploads/1/1/7/9/117990962/435334034.png)
• “Add thou not unto his words, lest he reprove thee, and thou be found a liar. Proverbs 30:6
Nov 09, 2012 It preserves the word order of the Septuagint, and aligns the Hebrew with that (PAHAGT preserves Hebrew word order) It has a much cleaner display, without the irritating vertical lines. It has morphology in both Greek and Hebrew (PAHAGT has no morphology at all) - including Hebrew roots. It has Bible Facts, Senses and Hebrew Strong's tagging. New Testament Greek to Hebrew Dictionary 500 Greek Words and The greek new testament is scrivener's textus receptus (1894), with stephens (1550) variants indicated in footnotes. This is a text which, for all intents and purposes, represents the greek readings selected by the translators of the king james bible.
Faithful Hebrew scribes took the task of copying God’s word seriously. According to the Hebrew Talmud the rules of the scribe consisted of the following:
• The skins of the parchment had to be prepared in a special way and dedicated to God. In order to have God’s words written on them they had to be clean.
• The ink that was used was to be black and made in accordance to a special recipe used only for writing scripture.
• The words written could not be duplicated by memory, but must be reproduced from an authentic copy which the scribe had before him. The scribe had to say each word aloud when he wrote them.
• Each time the scribe came across the Hebrew word for God, Jehovah (YHWH), he had to wash his whole body before he could write it.
• If a sheet of parchment had one mistake on it the sheet was condemned. If there were three mistakes found on any page the whole manuscript was condemned. Each scroll had to be checked within thirty days of it’s writing or it was considered unholy.
• Every word and letter was counted. If a letter or word was omitted the manuscript was condemned.
• The ink that was used was to be black and made in accordance to a special recipe used only for writing scripture.
• The words written could not be duplicated by memory, but must be reproduced from an authentic copy which the scribe had before him. The scribe had to say each word aloud when he wrote them.
• Each time the scribe came across the Hebrew word for God, Jehovah (YHWH), he had to wash his whole body before he could write it.
• If a sheet of parchment had one mistake on it the sheet was condemned. If there were three mistakes found on any page the whole manuscript was condemned. Each scroll had to be checked within thirty days of it’s writing or it was considered unholy.
• Every word and letter was counted. If a letter or word was omitted the manuscript was condemned.
As to the accuracy of the Hebrew Old Testament in our day, a study was done on the 581 manuscripts of the Old Testament which involved 280,000,000 letters. The study concluded:
1. Out of 280,000,000 letters there were 900,000 variants. Although seemingly large to the reader it is only one variant in 316 words, which is 1/3 of 1%.
2. Of those 900,000 variants, 750,000 pertained to spelling, whether the letter should be an I or U. This has to do with vowel points for the purpose of pronouncing the word.
3. That leaves 150,000 variants in 280,000,000 letters. That is one variant in 1580 letters with a degree of accuracy of .0006 (6 ten thousandths).
4. Most of the variants were found in just a few manuscripts; in fact, mostly in just one corrupted manuscript.
5. The earliest Masoretic Text is dated 900 AD. In the Book of Isaiah, only one three letter word was different.
6. The Masoretic text is the true text, because the Dead Seas scrolls were written by the Essenes.
2. Of those 900,000 variants, 750,000 pertained to spelling, whether the letter should be an I or U. This has to do with vowel points for the purpose of pronouncing the word.
3. That leaves 150,000 variants in 280,000,000 letters. That is one variant in 1580 letters with a degree of accuracy of .0006 (6 ten thousandths).
4. Most of the variants were found in just a few manuscripts; in fact, mostly in just one corrupted manuscript.
5. The earliest Masoretic Text is dated 900 AD. In the Book of Isaiah, only one three letter word was different.
6. The Masoretic text is the true text, because the Dead Seas scrolls were written by the Essenes.
The Septuagint exhibits considerable differences among themselves and they disagree with the Masoretic Text. The following are just a few of the errors:
1. There was a 500 year difference just during the time between Adam and Noah.
2. The Greek Septuagint teaches a local flood. It has Methuselah dying 14 years after the flood and he was not even on the ark!
3. The years of the Kings of Israel were incorrect.
4. Lucifer was not the Anointed Cherub as recorded in Ezekiel.
5. The account of the seventy two translators, which came to 6 out of each tribe, was not acceptable according to scripture. The Levites were the only tribe to keep and record the Oracles of God. (1 Chron. 16:4)
6. Jews were not permitted to live in Egypt (Deut. 17:16), but they did and they fell into idolatry. (Jeremiah 44 'Queen of Heaven”)
7. All copies of the Septuagint had originated from the school of Alexandria which was the home of Gnostic and Aryan teachings.
8. The story of the Septuagint, which has several contradictions, only deals with the translation of the first five books of the Old Testament, not the other thirty-four.
9. Both texts cannot be correct. Since the Hebrew text has demonstrated itself to be the word of God, then the Septuagint should be rejected.
1. There was a 500 year difference just during the time between Adam and Noah.
2. The Greek Septuagint teaches a local flood. It has Methuselah dying 14 years after the flood and he was not even on the ark!
3. The years of the Kings of Israel were incorrect.
4. Lucifer was not the Anointed Cherub as recorded in Ezekiel.
5. The account of the seventy two translators, which came to 6 out of each tribe, was not acceptable according to scripture. The Levites were the only tribe to keep and record the Oracles of God. (1 Chron. 16:4)
6. Jews were not permitted to live in Egypt (Deut. 17:16), but they did and they fell into idolatry. (Jeremiah 44 'Queen of Heaven”)
7. All copies of the Septuagint had originated from the school of Alexandria which was the home of Gnostic and Aryan teachings.
8. The story of the Septuagint, which has several contradictions, only deals with the translation of the first five books of the Old Testament, not the other thirty-four.
9. Both texts cannot be correct. Since the Hebrew text has demonstrated itself to be the word of God, then the Septuagint should be rejected.
Did our Lord Jesus Christ use the Septuagint?
Greek To Hebrew And Hebrew To Greek Dictionary Of Septuagint Words Pronunciation
It would seem that Jesus did not use the Septuagint for several reasons:
1. In Matt. 5:17 & 18, Jesus refers to the Law and the Prophets and then continues to say that not one “jot” or “tittle” would pass from the law until all be fulfilled. Jot & tittle refer to the Hebrew, not Greek.
2. In Matt. 23:35, Jesus tells the religious leaders of the day that they were guilty of the blood of the righteous from Abel to Zacharias. Zacharias is found in II Chronicles, which is the end of the Hebrew Old Testament, were as the Septuagint ends with Daniel before it goes into the Apocrypha. It seems as if he was telling them from beginning to end that they were guilty.
3. Jesus never made reference to any of the Aporcapha books which are in the Septuagint.
4. The Hebrew language was still active. When Paul met the Lord on the Damascus road Jesus spoke to him in Hebrew(Acts 26:14). Even when John wrote Revelation, he spoke about the last great battle which is known in the Hebrew tongue (Rev. 16:16) “Armageddon”.
1. In Matt. 5:17 & 18, Jesus refers to the Law and the Prophets and then continues to say that not one “jot” or “tittle” would pass from the law until all be fulfilled. Jot & tittle refer to the Hebrew, not Greek.
2. In Matt. 23:35, Jesus tells the religious leaders of the day that they were guilty of the blood of the righteous from Abel to Zacharias. Zacharias is found in II Chronicles, which is the end of the Hebrew Old Testament, were as the Septuagint ends with Daniel before it goes into the Apocrypha. It seems as if he was telling them from beginning to end that they were guilty.
3. Jesus never made reference to any of the Aporcapha books which are in the Septuagint.
4. The Hebrew language was still active. When Paul met the Lord on the Damascus road Jesus spoke to him in Hebrew(Acts 26:14). Even when John wrote Revelation, he spoke about the last great battle which is known in the Hebrew tongue (Rev. 16:16) “Armageddon”.
Was the Septuagint used by the New Testament writers?
Out of the 263 quotations of the Old Testament that are found in the New Testament, 85 of them correspond to the Septuagint, while the rest correspond to the Hebrew or vary from both. It would seem that there was no standardized Greek text of the Old Testament.
Out of the 263 quotations of the Old Testament that are found in the New Testament, 85 of them correspond to the Septuagint, while the rest correspond to the Hebrew or vary from both. It would seem that there was no standardized Greek text of the Old Testament.
Note: In the preface of the Septuagint there is a quote saying that there is a 3rd century B.C. Septuagint text that is extant(which means that they have such a copy). No such document exists today as we know it.
Was there a Pre Christian era Septuagint?
Paul Kahle, an Old Testament scholar (1875 1964), did extensive research on the Septuagint. His conclusions were that there was never one original, old Greek version and that the manuscripts of the Septuagint cannot be traced back to one archetype (original pattern).
An interesting thing to consider is that today scholars in both Old Testament and New Testament studies are relying on Alexandrian manuscripts to determine what is the best reading.
Years ago the Hebrew was held as the most reliable manuscript of the Old Testament. In the last 100 years the Greek Septuagint has replaced the Hebrew in scholarly circles.
One of Satan’s greatest tactics is to sow seeds of doubt that will lead to disbelief concerning God’s word. As was in the garden, so is today.
An interesting thing to consider is that today scholars in both Old Testament and New Testament studies are relying on Alexandrian manuscripts to determine what is the best reading.
Years ago the Hebrew was held as the most reliable manuscript of the Old Testament. In the last 100 years the Greek Septuagint has replaced the Hebrew in scholarly circles.
One of Satan’s greatest tactics is to sow seeds of doubt that will lead to disbelief concerning God’s word. As was in the garden, so is today.
“Yea hath God Said?”
To the Christian, the enemy’s aim is to destroy his faith in the word of God. To the unbeliever, he aims to blind the minds of the unbelieving (2 Corinthians 4:4).
Which one will you choose?
As I read Isaiah 22:19 recently, I had a question about a rarely occurring word in that verse. The Greek reads:
καὶ ἀφαιρεθήσῃ ἐκ τῆς οἰκονομίας σου καὶ ἐκ τῆς στάσεώς σου.
(And you will be removed from your office and from your post.)
The word οἰκονομία occurs in the Septuagint only here and two verses later. In the New Testament it appears just nine times.
A traditional lexicon (like LEH or LSJ) can give useful information about the word, but not necessarily any information about the underlying Hebrew. LEH just has, “Is 22:19-21 stewardship.” Muraoka’s work, by contrast, is a two-way index, which means you don’t get a definition or gloss (as LEH or LSJ give). What you do get, however, is what Hebrew word a given Greek word is thought to have translated. As here:
Already the reader is interested to see that the same Greek word used twice within three verses translates a different underlying Hebrew word in each case. (N.B.: I realize that in Septuagint lexicography, to speak of “Greek that translates Hebrew” is an oversimplification, as there are other textual considerations that give rise to a given “Septuagint” text.)
Then one can consult the Hebrew–>Greek portion of the index (part two of the book) to see what other Greek words (if any) are used where each of those two Hebrew words is used. In other words, Muraoka helps answer the question: did the translator of Greek Isaiah have other Greek options available to him when confronted with the Hebrew text?
Looking at Muraoka’s entry for the first of the two options above (ממשׁלה), the answer is yes:
What is of note here is that Muraoka’s work makes it possible to see at a glance what sort of translation decisions have been made in going from Hebrew to Greek text.
As I study the Septuagint, I (and others) wonder about these things. How often does the Greek καρδία translate the Hebrew לבב? This breaks down into two questions: (1) What other Greek words are used to translate לבב? and (2) For occurrences in the Greek text of καρδία, what other Hebrew words might it be translating?
Muraoka writes this in the introduction:
This two-way index is meant to supplement our recently published lexicon as well as Hatch and Redpath’s Septuagint Concordance.
Up to the second edition of our lexicon published in 2002 many of the entry words had at the end a list of Hebrew/Aramaic words or phrases which are translated in the Septuagint with the entry word in question. In the latest edition of the lexicon, however, we have decided to delete all these lists as not integral to the lexicon. This set of information is important all the same for better understanding of the Septuagint, its translation techniques, the Septuagint translators’ ways of relating to the Hebrew/Aramaic words and phrases in their original text. In order fully to understand how a Hebrew/Aramaic lexeme or phrase X was perceived to relate to a Greek lexeme or phrase Y one would need to study each biblical passage, with the help of HR, to which the equivalence applies. Yet a quick overview of, and easy access to, the range of Greek words or phrases can be helpful and illuminating. Therefore we are presenting these data here separately as Part I of this two-way Index.
As shown in the example above, part 1 is Greek to Hebrew. Part 2 is Hebrew to Greek.
The numbers next to the Greek words above are a key to the Hatch-Redpath Concordance that Muraoka mentions. That concordance (published early in the 20th century), has all the Greek words used in the Septuagint, together with what was thought to be the underlying Hebrew. The back of the HR concordance has a list that shows all the Hebrew words (alphabetically) with the Greek words used to translate them. But you actually just get an entry like this…
אָמַר qal 37c, 74a, 109c, 113c, 120a, 133a, 222a, 267a, 299b, 306b, 313a, 329c, 339b, 365a, 384a, 460c, 477a, 503c, 505c, 520b, 534c, 537b, 538b, 553b, 628b, 757b, 841c, 863c, 881c, 991b, 1056b, 1060a, 1061a, 1139a, 1213b, 1220c, 1231b, c, 1310b, 1318b, 1423c, 1425b, 69b, 72b, 173a, 183b, c, 200a(2), 207 c, 211b.
…so that you have to go back manually through the concordance to see what words are at 37c (page 37, column c), 74a, etc. It would be tedious to look up all the Greek words translated the Hebrew אָמַר.
The second half of the two-way index more conveniently lists the above entry as:
אָמַר qal αἰτεῖν (37c), ἀναγγέλλειν (74a)…
Greek To Hebrew And Hebrew To Greek Dictionary Of Septuagint Words Generator
The HR page and column references are still there, but the actual Greek words are present now.
Muraoka has also updated HR’s lexical analysis by including insights gained recently through textual criticism, new manuscripts (HR did not have the Dead Sea Scrolls), more analysis of apocryphal/deuterocanonical books, and so on.
In part one (only) Muraoka includes basic frequency statistics–how many times a given Hebrew word is what the Greek entry translates. In this index he is “content with the use of <+> symbol…when a given equivalence appears to occur very frequently.” The statistics are not comprehensive or complete, as Muraoka points out.
It’s not fair to fault Muraoka for not including a definition or gloss for his entries, since this is an index. The reader just needs to make sure to know this doesn’t and isn’t intended to replace a full-blown lexicon.
In fact, I appreciated Muraoka’s humility and realism in writing:
Greek To Hebrew And Hebrew To Greek Dictionary Of Septuagint Words In The Bible
Our revision of HR, however, is still incomplete. Ideally, one should study each verse of every Septuagint book translated from either Hebrew or Aramaic and compare it with what is judged to be the Semitic Vorlage of the Septuagint text. This is a project for the future, and we doubt that such an investigation can be performed wholly and mechanically with a computer.
This is, in fact, the best way to use the index–with a computer and the original language texts nearby to do further investigation as needed. But even with a computer, the index is an invaluable resource and welcome contribution to the growing field of Septuagint studies. Muraoka has done a great service to Septuagint readers by publishing the two-way index.
Thanks to Peeters Publishers for the review copy of this work, offered without any expectation as to the positive or critical nature of my review. The book’s product page is here. It’s on Amazon here.