09-10-2016, 12:05 PM
The Old Latin (from Sabatier): ... & in nomine ejus gentes sperabunt. (name)
.. in contrast to ..
Vulgata: ... & legem ejus insulæ exspectabunt (law)
So we have the most ancient Greek and Latin versions + Matthew as witnesses for name.
And the Hebrew and Aramaic versions + Vulgata as witnesses for law.
In Greek the variations would read:
ΚΑΙΕΠΙΤΩΟΝΟΜΑΤΙΑΥΤΟΥΕΘΝΗΕΛΠΙΟΥΣΙΝ (name)
ΚΑΙΤΩΝΟΜΩΑΥΤΟΥΝΗΣΟΙΕΛΠΙΟΥΣΙΝ (law)
The words νομος and ονομα are similar, so one would like to think that a scribal error happened when someone read from a Greek exemplar, but if the scribe copied from Greek to Greek, the addition or excision of επι would need to be explained too.
LEH mentions Numbers 4:27.
LXX: ... καὶ ἐπισκέψῃ αὐτοὺς ἐξ ὀνομάτων πάντα τὰ ἀρτὰ ὑπ᾿ αὐτῶν (by name)
MT: ופקדתם עלהם במשמרת את כל–משאם
Could משמרת be ambigous enough to cause both readings?
.. in contrast to ..
Vulgata: ... & legem ejus insulæ exspectabunt (law)
So we have the most ancient Greek and Latin versions + Matthew as witnesses for name.
And the Hebrew and Aramaic versions + Vulgata as witnesses for law.
In Greek the variations would read:
ΚΑΙΕΠΙΤΩΟΝΟΜΑΤΙΑΥΤΟΥΕΘΝΗΕΛΠΙΟΥΣΙΝ (name)
ΚΑΙΤΩΝΟΜΩΑΥΤΟΥΝΗΣΟΙΕΛΠΙΟΥΣΙΝ (law)
The words νομος and ονομα are similar, so one would like to think that a scribal error happened when someone read from a Greek exemplar, but if the scribe copied from Greek to Greek, the addition or excision of επι would need to be explained too.
LEH mentions Numbers 4:27.
LXX: ... καὶ ἐπισκέψῃ αὐτοὺς ἐξ ὀνομάτων πάντα τὰ ἀρτὰ ὑπ᾿ αὐτῶν (by name)
MT: ופקדתם עלהם במשמרת את כל–משאם
Could משמרת be ambigous enough to cause both readings?