Can We at Least Agree on the OT?

Discussion in '2003 Archive' started by Dr. Bob, Aug 10, 2003.

  1. Dr. Bob

    Dr. Bob
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2000
    Messages:
    29,402
    Likes Received:
    12
    Lots of fussing over the great variety of NT Greek texts. Many opt for a MODERN eclectic text from thousands of Greek ms. Others opt for a OLDER eclectic text compiled by Erasmus or Stephens from a few Greek ms.

    Some are now saying they prefer the KJV because it is TRO (textus receptus only).

    Okay. What about the OT? Isn't the Hebrew text for the KJV, NKJV, NASB, NIV basically the same exact text? If so, then why can't we fuss over the NT while agreeing on the OT?

    Thoughts?
     
  2. DCK

    DCK
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2003
    Messages:
    88
    Likes Received:
    0
    I'm not KJVO, but I would guess that they oppose the use of the LXX, Samaritan Pentateuch, Dead Sea Scrolls, etc. to correct the Old Testament text. The OT of modern versions is, after all, not identical to the OT of the KJV (Psalm 145:13, e.g.).
     
  3. rlvaughn

    rlvaughn
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2001
    Messages:
    5,139
    Likes Received:
    25
    Agree!! Agree?? We are Baptists! You want us to agree?????
    :confused:
    [​IMG]
     
  4. BrianT

    BrianT
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2002
    Messages:
    3,516
    Likes Received:
    0
    The OT also contains several textual/mansucript issues, just fewer of them. Generally the Masoretic is the "standard" accepted by all, but specific readings still pose interesting puzzles, even *internal* to Masoretic texts.

    DCK mentioned Psalm 145:13, where the longer reading has support from the LXX and Syriac texts - the longer reading also has support in at least one Masoretic text as well.

    Another issue I find fascinating is the qere/ketiv issue. This is where in the Masoretic texts, marginal notes are present. When reading a text aloud, you were supposed to read the marginal note (the "qere") but when writing the text (copying, etc.) you were supposed to use the text itself (the "ketiv"). Often the qere is quite different from the ketiv, and this presents difficult problems for translators. For just one example, in Job 13:15 the NIV has "Though he slay me, yet will I hope in him; I will surely defend my ways to his face." Here, the NIV translates from the qere (the margin). The RSV, translating from the ketiv (the text) says "Behold, he will slay me; I have no hope; yet I will defend my ways to his face."

    The textual issues of the OT maybe don't occur as often as in the NT, but they still exist. I don't think you'll get everyone to agree on all the OT issues, but it would be cool. [​IMG]
     

Share This Page

Loading...