Peshitta Forum

Full Version: Why is the Peshitta qouting the Septuagint?
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Pages: 1 2
I have not seen this delt with here, so I'll point it out.

Hebrews 10:5 in the Aramaic text reads: "...In sacrifices and oblations you have not had pleasure; but you have clothed me with a body."

Hebrews 10:5 in the Greek text reads: "...You did not want sacrifices and offerings, but you prepared a body for me."

So the Aramaic & Greek text of Hebrews 10:5 agree.

And this is a qoute from Psalm 40:6

But, it is not taken from the Hebrew text, at least from the oldest known Hebrew text we have today...which reads thus: "Sacrifice and meal offering You have not desired; My ears You have opened (or pierced);..."

Jerome is said to have used the Septuagint for his Psalms translation, but we see that it reads there as the current Hebrew text does: "Sacrifice and oblation thou didst not desire; but thou hast pierced ears for me..."

I then checked with the Peshitta, to see what it reads, and the Lamsa translation reads thus: "Sacrifices and offerings Thou didst not require; but as for me, I now have understanding;..."

Then I checked the Targum for Psalm 40:6 (7) and it reads thus: "You do not want sacrifice and offering; you have scooped out ears for me to hear your redemption;..."

So, none of these texts match the qoute that is found in Hebrews 10:5 which both the Aramaic & Greek text shows.

Then I looked at the Septuagint Greek translation of the Hebrew Old Testament text that was current when it was made over a 1000 years before the currently oldest surviving Hebrew text we have today, and it reads thus: "Sacrifice and offering you wanted not, but a body you prepared for me;..."

So...why is the Aramaic Peshitta text of Hebrews 10:5 giving the Greek Septuagint reading, which is what the writter of the Book of Hebrews qoutes from, and is also the same in the Greek New Testament text?
Shlama Akhi Chuck. What makes this a quote of Psalm 40?

Shmasha

PS, only some LXX manuscripts have this reading. The majority read like the Hebrew, Peshitta and Vulgate.
What passage is it quoting if not Psalm 40:6 ??? It is a clear qoute from that passage is it not. And which Septuagint manuscripts show the same reading as the Hebrew and Peshitta? I'd like to know which.
Shlama Akhi Chuck,

Thirdwoe Wrote:What passage is it quoting if not Psalm 40:6 ??? It is a clear qoute from that passage is it not.

I don't think it's directly quoting any passage. Paul is simply writing what God said when He came into this world, in the third person:

Quote:Therefore, when Christ came into the world, he said: "Sacrifice and offering you did not desire, but a body you prepared for me;" .....

There is no mention of the Psalmist, although Paul may have been alluding to that portion of scripture in this teaching. But I don't see this as necessarily a quote. When you read my reply to the below question, this may make a bit more sense.

Thirdwoe Wrote:And which Septuagint manuscripts show the same reading as the Hebrew and Peshitta? I'd like to know which.

I'm not sure which manuscript numbers they are, you'll need to research this portion. All the material I have says this is a minority reading in the LXX manuscripts. And it makes sense, here why:

I believe the MSS, Targum, Peshitta, and Vulgate have the correct reading for Psalm 40. I think some of the LXX manuscripts were later modified by Christian (Greek) scribes to conform them to the reading in Hebrews 10:5, falsely believing that Paul was quoting directly from Psalm 40.

My question originally was, why does this have to be a direct quotation of Psalm 40 from Paul? It actually makes more sense that Paul was paraphrasing, and (some) Greek scribes later revised manuscripts of the LXX to conform to it. There have been other cases where OT passages were altered to more closely read like NT passages.

This makes the fact that only some LXX copies read this way for Psalm 40, make more sense.

+Shamasha
Clearly that whole passage in Hebrews 10:5-9....is all from Psalm 40:6-8. But whether the Greek Septuagint was changed to read like what is found in Hebrews, could be proven easily enough...I'll do the research to see which ones read like the current Hebrew and in the Vulgate and Peshitta, but the three main texts from which I have English translations of here at the house, all have the same reading in them as is found in the Hebrew qoute.

Where would the Apostle Paul get the words "but a body you have prepared for me" from? Are you thinking that Jesus may have spoken this saying when He preaching during His ministry on earth and is not a qoute from Psalm 40:6? The rest of the passage is clearly the same wording as found in Psalm 40:5-9 The line "but a body you have prepared for me" is in the same place, right where these other words are, as found in the Hebrew, Vulgate, and Peshitta.

Hebrew: "My ears You have pierced"
Vulgate: "but thou hast pierced ears for me"
Peshitta: "but you have pierced the ears for me." -Bauscher (I chose Bauscher's translation here over the of Lamsa's because it is more litteral, than interpretive.)
The author of Hebrews is not quoting the LXX or the massoretic hebrew text.
This leaves several possibilities.
1. The author is paraphrasing (or doing as Paul Y suggested above)
2.The author quotes an aramaic targum we no longer have. (see Pauls quote of psalm 68:18 in epesians!)
3.The author quotes an old hebrew text that we no longer have (we know from the DSS that there was more than one version of the hebrew bible back in that time).

Interestingly IIRC Andrew GR once indicated that the Zohar contained a reading which partly agreed with psalm 40 as quoted in the NT.
I think you'll find that the LXX differs slightly from the quote in hebrews but where it differs the Zohar agrees. Thats IIRC.
You''l find it in the old forum which is somehow still avaliable (maybe in the wayback machine, not sure how to get it)
Thirdwoe Wrote:Are you thinking that Jesus may have spoken this saying when He preaching during His ministry on earth and is not a qoute from Psalm 40:6?

Yes, clearly it states in verse 5 that Meshikha spoke this. The explanation that makes the most sense is that some copies of the LXX were revised in the post-Christian era to conform the reading from Psalm 40 to the reading of Hebrews 10:5.

The LXX had a long, sordid history. This is from the Catholic Encyclopedia, volume 4:

[Image: lxx.jpg]
Judge, please explain your statement about Psalm 68:18 as qouted in Ephesians 4:8. I see that the qoute matches what is found in the Hebrew (MT), Greek (SEP), and Aramaic (PESH), Old Testament.
Thirdwoe Wrote:Judge, please explain your statement about Psalm 68:18 as qouted in Ephesians 4:8. I see that the qoute matches what is found in the Hebrew (MT), Greek (SEP), and Aramaic (PESH), Old Testament.

Ephesians has "gave", which matches an aramaic targum we have.
The others have "received".

IIRC the whole story relates back to something to do with moses in the torah.
Judge, can you please direct me to a site that has the Psalm targums....the one I have found online show that "gave" is in italics...meaning that the word is not present in the original text...
If you're looking at the work I think you're looking at, I suggest you read the intro text of the translation work:
Edward Cook Wrote:4. Text not represented in some way in the Hebrew original is signaled by italics. The absence of italics should not be construed to mean that the targum translates literally.
(From <!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://targum.info/targumic-texts/targumim-of-the-psalms/">http://targum.info/targumic-texts/targu ... he-psalms/</a><!-- m -->)
Exactly...perhaps this is why we see two words "gave" and "recieved" because it is not said either way in the text. Also, the word for "recieved" in Greek, can mean "bring to" or "brought" so, it could be said that "He brought gifts to mankind...."
Thirdwoe Wrote:Exactly...perhaps this is why we see two words "gave" and "recieved" because it is not said either way in the text. ...."

But it is said in the text.
Ephesians and a targum we have read "gave" and other versions read "received".
Thirdwoe Wrote:Exactly...perhaps this is why we see two words "gave" and "recieved" because it is not said either way in the text. Also, the word for "recieved" in Greek, can mean "bring to" or "brought" so, it could be said that "He brought gifts to mankind...."

The Hebrew text explicitly reads as 'receive.' What I meant by posting the introduction is that if you read it carefully, it says that italics are not meant in any way to show words that don't appear in the source text, but rather words in the Targum that vary from the Hebrew. The translator would not have translated the verse as 'gave' if it were not necessitated by the Targumic text.

Take a look at the Peshitta Tanakh's take on this verse:
The word in the Aramaic variably reads, between manuscripts, [font="Estrangelo (V1.1)"]Bsn[/font] (to receive) and [font="Estrangelo (V1.1)"]Bhy[/font] (to give) which could be mistaken one for another in the Estrangelo script.
The words following the verb are: [font="Estrangelo (V1.1)"]04n0 Ynbl Fbhwm[/font]
Interpreted: gifts (to/for)-sons of-men
Notice that the word used for gift ([font="Estrangelo (V1.1)"]Fbhwm[/font]) is also derived from [font="Estrangelo (V1.1)"]Bhy[/font] (to give).
So reading the verb as (to give) makes it nearly equivalent to Peshitta Ephesians reading:
Psalm 68:18 - [font="Estrangelo (V1.1)"]04n0 Ynbl Fbhwm Bhy[/font]
Ephesians 4:8 - [font="Estrangelo (V1.1)"]04nynbl Fbhwm Bhy[/font]

Both the Septuagint and the Vulgate read 'received' for Psalm 68:18.
i also found a lot of LXX in hebrews. it made me t oend up that hebrews may have been neither aramaic nor geek, though that makes no sense either. What i found was where the LXX and hebrews interpret angels for hebrew elohim, which is an unusual harmony, and a few other things in ch. 1-4.
Pages: 1 2