Sunday, March 12, 2017

Different vocalic readings
of the Hebrew text:
Merely issues of interpretation /

Διαφορετικές φωνηεντικές αναγνώσεις
του εβραϊκού κειμένου:
Απλώς ζητήματα ερμηνείας





In discussing this version [LXX] it will be necessary to observe at the outset that there were no vowel signs in the Hebrew text from which the Septuagint was made, nor were there any accentual signs. Both of these systems of signs used in the Hebrew manuscripts were first introduced into the text by certain scribes called Massoretes who lived about the year a.d. 500. These signs represented the exegesis of the Rabbis of that time. Whenever, therefore, the Greek translators translate the same consonants as those found in the Hebrew text, but with the use of different vowels from those affixed by the later Hebrew scribes, the Greek translation represents only a different exegesis of the original text. Thus the consonants עד in Prov. xii. 19, Amos i. 11, Mi. vii. 18 and Zeph. iii. 8 are read ‘ad (ever) by the Massoretes and ‘ed (witness) by the Greek exegetes; in Gen. xlix. 27 ‘ad (prey) and ‘od (again). In Ps. l. 23 the letters זבח are read by the Massoretes as a participle zobeah (sacrificer) and by the Greeks as zebah (sacrifice). In Ps. xc. 5 the Massoretes read שנה as shenah (sleep) and the Greeks shanah (year). In Gen. vi. 5 the Hebrew pronounces יצר as yeser (imagination) and the Greek as yasar (imagines). There are hundreds of such different readings of the original text; but they do not affect that text itself but merely the interpretation of it.

Κατά την εξέταση αυτή της μεταφρασης [της Ο'] είναι απαραίτητο να παρατηρήσουμε εξαρχής ότι δεν υπήρχαν φωνηεντικά σημεία στο εβραϊκό κείμενο βάσει του οποίου εκπονήθηκε η Εβδομήκοντα, ούτε τονικά σημεία. Και τα δύο αυτά συστήματα στίξης που χρησιμοποιούνται στα εβραϊκά χειρόγραφα εισάχθηκαν για πρώτη φορά στο κείμενο από κάποιους γραμματείς που λέγονταν Μασορίτες οι οποίοι έζησαν περί το έτος 500 μ.Χ. Αυτά τα σημεία αντιπροσώπευαν την εξήγηση των Ραββίνων εκείνης της εποχής. Συνεπώς, όποτε οι Έλληνες μεταφραστές μεταφράζουν τα ίδια σύμφωνα με αυτά που βρίσκονται στο εβραϊκό κείμενο, αλλά χρησιμοποιώντας διαφορετικά φωνήεντα από αυτά που επέθεσαν μεταγενέστεροι Εβραίοι γραμματεία, το ελληνικό μετάφρασμα αναπαριστά απλώς και μόνο μόνο μια διαφορετική εξήγηση του πρωτότυπου κειμένου. Έτσι, τα σύμφωνα עד στα εδ. Παρ. 12:19, Αμώς 1:11, Μιχ. 7:18 και Σοφ. 3:8 διαβάζονται ως ‘ad (πάντα) από τους Μασορίτες και ‘ed (μάρτυρας) από τους Έλληνες εξηγητές· στο εδ. Γεν. 49:27 ‘ad (θήραμα) και ‘od (ξανά). Στο εδ. Ψαλ. 50:23 τα γράμματα זבח διαβάζονται από τους Μασορίτες ως μετοχή zobeah (ο θυσιάζων) και από τους Έλληνες zebah (θυσία). Στο εδ. Ψαλ. 90:5 οι Μασορίτες διαβάζουν το שנה ως shenah (ύπνος) και οι Έλληνες shanah (έτος). Στο εδ. Γεν. 6:5 οι Εβραίοι προφέρουν το יצר ως yeser (φαντασία) και οι Έλληνες yasar (εικόνες). Υπάρχουν εκατοντάδες τέτοιες διαφορετικές αναγνώσεις του πρωτότυπου κειμένου· αλλά αυτές δεν επηρεάζουν το κείμενο καθαυτό αλλά μόνο την ερμηνεία του.


* Robert Dick Wilson,
The Textual Criticism of the Old Testament
«Η Κριτική του Κειμένου της Παλαιάς Διαθήκης»,
The Princeton Theological Review, Vol./τόμ. 27, 1929,
pp./σσ. 49, 50 [36-60.]

*

Tuesday, March 7, 2017

Martin Werner
on the pre-Arian notion of θεός

Ο Martin Werner
περί της προαρειανής έννοιας τού θεός








* Martin Werner,
The formation of Christian dogma

[Η διαμόρφωση του χριστιανικού δόγματος],

translated by S. G. F.. Brandon.
New York: Harper & Brothers, 1957,
p./σ. 140.



Sunday, March 5, 2017

Ο Ειρηναίος Λουγδούνου
περί της αναστάσεως των νεκρών /

Irenaeus of Lyons
about the resurrection of the dead


Λεπτομέρεια από τη
σταυροθήκη του Guennol.

Αἱ ψυχαὶ ἀπέρχονται εἰς τὸν τόπον τὸν ὡρισμένον αὐταῖς ἀπὸ τοῦ Θεοῦ κἀκεῖ μέχρι τῆς ἀναστάσεως φοιτῶσι περιμένουσαι τὴν ἀνάστασιν· ἔπειτα ἀπολαβοῦσαι τὰ σώματα καὶ ὁλοκλήρως ἀναστᾶσαι, τουτέστι σωματικῶς, καθὼς καὶ ὁ Κύριος ἀνέστη, οὕτως ἐλεύσονται εἰς τὴν ὄψιν τοῦ Θεοῦ.

* Ειρηναίος Λυώνος,
Έλεγχος και Ανατροπή της Ψευδωνύμου Γνώσεως
Βιβλίο 5, Fragment 27.

Wednesday, March 1, 2017

Ο Φίλων περί των όρων
«ο θεός» & «θεός» /

Philo on the terms
“the god”/“God” and “[a] god”





Ἀλλὰ γὰρ οὐ χρὴ κατεπτηχέναι τὸν ἐλπίδι θείας συμμαχίας ἐφορμοῦντα, ᾧ καὶ λέγεται· “ἐγώ εἰμι ὁ θεὸς ὁ ὀφθείς σοι ἐν τόπῳ θεοῦ” (Gen. 31:13).

πάγκαλόν γε αὔχημα ψυχῇ, τὸ ἀξιοῦν θεὸν ἐπιφαίνεσθαι καὶ ἐνομιλεῖν αὐτῇ. μὴ παρέλθῃς δὲ τὸ εἰρημένον, ἀλλὰ ἀκριβῶς ἐξέτασον, εἰ τῷ ὄντι δύο εἰσὶ θεοί· λέγεται γὰρ ὅτι “ἐγώ εἰμι ὁ θεὸς ὁ ὀφθείς σοι”, οὐκ ἐν τόπῳ ἐμῷ, ἀλλ’ “ἐν τόπῳ θεοῦ,” ὡς ἂν ἑτέρου. τί οὖν χρὴ λέγειν;

ὁ μὲν ἀληθείᾳ θεὸς εἷς ἐστιν, οἱ δ’ ἐν καταχρήσει λεγόμενοι πλείους. διὸ καὶ ὁ ἱερὸς λόγος ἐν τῷ παρόντι τὸν μὲν ἀληθείᾳ διὰ τοῦ ἄρθρου μεμήνυκεν εἰπών· “ἐγώ εἰμι ὁ θεός”, τὸν δ’ ἐν καταχρήσει χωρὶς ἄρθρου φάσκων· “ὁ ὀφθείς σοι ἐν τόπῳ”, οὐ τοῦ θεοῦ, ἀλλ’ αὐτὸ μόνον “θεοῦ”.

καλεῖ δὲ θεὸν τὸν πρεσβύτατον αὐτοῦ νυνὶ λόγον, οὐ δεισιδαιμονῶν περὶ τὴν θέσιν τῶν ὀνομάτων, ἀλλ’ ἓν τέλος προτεθειμένος, πραγματολογῆσαι. καὶ γὰρ ἐν ἑτέροις σκεψάμενος, εἰ ἔστι τι τοῦ ὄντος ὄνομα, σαφῶς ἔγνω ὅτι κύριον μὲν οὐδέν (Ex. 6:3), ὃ δ’ ἂν εἴπῃ τις, καταχρώμενος ἐρεῖ· λέγεσθαι γὰρ οὐ πέφυκεν, ἀλλὰ μόνον εἶναι τὸ ὄν.

μαρτυρεῖ δὲ καὶ τὸ θεσπισθὲν λόγιον τῷ πυνθανομένῳ, εἰ ἔστιν ὄνομα αὐτῷ, ὅτι “ἐγώ εἰμι ὁ ὤν” (Ex. 3:14), ἵν’ ὧν δυνατὸν [v.l. ἀδύνατον] ἀνθρώπῳ καταλαβεῖν μὴ ὄντων περὶ θεόν, ἐπιγνῷ τὴν ὕπαρξιν.

ταῖς μὲν οὖν ἀσωμάτοις καὶ θεραπευτρίσιν αὐτοῦ ψυχαῖς εἰκὸς αὐτὸν οἷός ἐστιν ἐπιφαίνεσθαι διαλεγόμενον ὡς φίλον φίλαις, ταῖς δὲ ἔτι ἐν σώματι ἀγγέλοις εἰκαζόμενον, οὐ μεταβάλλοντα τὴν ἑαυτοῦ φύσιν – ἄτρεπτος γάρ –, ἀλλὰ δόξαν ἐντιθέντα ταῖς φαντασιουμέναις ἑτερόμορφον, ὡς τὴν εἰκόνα οὐ μίμημα, ἀλλ’ αὐτὸ τὸ ἀρχέτυπον ἐκεῖνο εἶδος ὑπολαμβάνειν εἶναι.

* Φίλων / Philo,
Περί τού θεοπέμπτους είναι τους ονείρους /
De somniis 1.227-233.



Yet there can be no cowering fear for the man who relies on the hope of the divine comradship, to whom are addressed the words “I am the God who appeared to thee in the place of God.” (Gen. 31:13)

Surely a right noble cause of vaunting it is, for a soul that God deigns to show himself to and converse with it. And do not fail to mark the language used, but carefully inquire whether there are two Gods; for we read “I am the God that appeared to thee,” not "in my place" but “in the place of God,” as thought it were another’s. What then are we to say?

He that is truly God is one, but those that are improperly so-called are more than one. Accordingly, the holy word in the present instance has indicated Him Who truly is God by means of the articles, saying “I am the God,” while it omits the article when mentioning him who is improperly so called, saying “who appeared to thee in the place" not "of the God” but simply “of God.”

Here it gives the title of “God” to His chief Word, not from any superstitious nicety in applying names, but with one aim before him, to use words to express facts. Thus in another place, when he had inquired whether He that is has any name, he came to know full well that He has no proper name (Ex. 6:3), and that whatever name anyone may use of Him he will use by licence of language; for it is not the nature of Him that is to be spoken of, but simply to be.

Testimony to this is afforded also by the divine response made to Moses’ question whether He has a name, even “I am He that is” (Ex. 3:14). It was given in order that, since there are not in God things which man can comprehend, man may recognize His subsistence.

To the souls indeed which are incorporeal and are occupied in His worship it is likely that He should reveal Himself as He is, conversing with them as friend with friends; but to souls which are still in a body, giving Himself the likeness of angels, not altering His own nature, for He is unchangeable, but conveying to those which receive the impression of His presence a semblance in a different form, such that they take the image to be not a copy, but that original form itself.


(transl. Colson & Whitaker)

But it is not right for the man who anchors on the hope of the alliance of God to crouch and tremble, to whom God says, "I am the God who was seen by thee in the place of God." (Gen. 31:13)

A very glorious boast for the soul, that God should think fit to appear to and to converse with it. And do not pass by what is here said, but examine it accurately, and see whether there are really two Gods. For it is said: "I am the God who was seen by thee;" not in my place, but in the place of God, as if he meant of some other God. What then ought we to say?

There is one true God only: but they who are called Gods, by an abuse of language, are numerous; on which account the holy scripture on the present occasion indicates that it is the true God that is meant by the use of the article, the expression being, "I am the God (ὁ Θεός);" but when the word is used incorrectly, it is put without the article, the expression being, "He who was seen by thee in the place," not of the God (τοῦ Θεοῦ), but simply "of God" (
Θεοῦ);

and what he here calls God is his most ancient word, not having any superstitious regard to the position of the names, but only proposing one end to himself, namely, to give a true account of the matter; for in other passages the sacred historian, when he considered whether there really was any name belonging to the living God, showed that he knew that there was none properly belonging to him (Ex. 6:3); but that whatever appellation any one may give him, will be an abuse of terms; for the living God is not of a nature to be described, but only to be.

And a proof of this may be found in the oracular answer given by God to the person who asked what name he had, "I am that I Am," (Ex. 3:14) that the questioner might know the existence of those things which it was not possible for man to conceive not being connected with God.

Accordingly, to the incorporeal souls which are occupied in his service, it is natural for him to appear as he is, conversing with them as a friend with his friends; but to those souls which are still in the body he must appear in the resemblance of the angels, though without changing his nature (for he is unchangeable), but merely implanting in those who behold him an idea of his having another form, so that they fancy that it is his image, not an imitation of him, but the very archetypal appearance itself.


(transl. C. D. Yonge)

*

Monday, February 27, 2017

Το σημάδι /

The mark


P47
(3ος αιώνας / 3rd cent.)



16 Και τους εξαναγκάζει όλους, τους μικρούς και τους μεγάλους, και τους πλούσιους και τους φτωχούς, και τους ελεύθερους και τους δούλους, ώστε να δοθεί σε αυτούς σημάδι [χάραγμα, ΝΑ28] στο δεξί τους χέρι ή στο μέτωπό τους, 17 και κανείς να μην μπορεί να αγοράσει ή να πουλήσει παρά μόνο εκείνος που έχει το σημάδι, το όνομα του θηρίου ή τον αριθμό του ονόματός του. 18 Εδώ είναι που υπεισέρχεται η σοφία: Εκείνος που έχει νοημοσύνη ας υπολογίσει τον αριθμό του θηρίου, γιατί είναι αριθμός ανθρώπου· και ο αριθμός του είναι εξακόσια εξήντα έξι.
* Απ/Rev 13:16-18, ΑΓΝΚ.
 
4 »Άκου, Ισραήλ: Ο Ιεχωβά ο Θεός μας είναι ένας Ιεχωβά. 5 Και πρέπει να αγαπάς τον Ιεχωβά τον Θεό σου με όλη σου την καρδιά και με όλη σου την ψυχή και με όλη τη ζωτική σου δύναμη. 6 Και αυτά τα λόγια τα οποία σε προστάζω σήμερα πρέπει να είναι στην καρδιά σου· 7 και πρέπει να τα ενσταλάζεις στους γιους σου και να μιλάς για αυτά όταν κάθεσαι στο σπίτι σου και όταν περπατάς στο δρόμο και όταν ξαπλώνεις και όταν σηκώνεσαι. 8 Και πρέπει να τα δέσεις ως σημείο [σημεῖον, Ο΄] πάνω στο χέρι σου, και θα είναι προμετωπίδια κορδέλα ανάμεσα στα μάτια σου· 9 και πρέπει να τα γράψεις πάνω στους παραστάτες του σπιτιού σου και στις πύλες σου.
* Δευ/Deu 6:4-9, ΑΓΝΚ.