13 replies to this topic

[rebornID]

Is there an available Esword module that provides the LXX in English illustrating  variations between the Byzantine and Alexandrian text.  The Majority and Masoretic Text.
Or a module that list an exhaustive list of variations commonly found in study bibles between various manuscripts.
Or even book or reference modules on these topics.

I found LXX versions that were in Greek only.

Is there an English translation with Strong's numbers.

Thank you

[APsit190]

As far as I can see, no there isn't.

[JPG]

There is the

Apostolic Bible Polyglot w/ Strong's Numbers. The Apostolic Bible Polyglot is a Greek-English Interlinear of the Greek Septuagint and New Testament coded to Strong's numbers.

This one is available e-Sword built-in downloader.

[Katoog]

Let's start to teach what the LXX and Masoretic Text are.
The LXX or Septuagint was a Greek translation on request of Ptolemy II Philadelphus (285–247 BC) by 70 Jewish scholars and made in 72 days.

LXX=70 in Roman numbers.
And was made in Alexandria BUT is not called the Alexandrian Text.

The Original LXX is lost but now is every Old Greek translation of the Old Testament called the LXX.
There is no module with the textual variants or collation between the LXX editions.
The Apostolic Bible Polyglot w/ Strong's Numbers is a kind of English LXX translation.
Other English translations are Brenton's English Septuagint, Charles Thomson Bible 1808.

 

The Masoretic Text are copies of the Hebrew Old Testament made between 10th century AD and the 16th century.
But some mean commentaries may give information about the differences between the Masoretic Texts and some LXX editions by the verse.
The commentaries of Adam Clarke, Albert Barnes, John Hill are by the download of the e-Sword program.

Now about the New Testament:
The Textus Receptus is the"Received Text" or "Ecclesiastical Text" or standard or stream of the Greek New Testament used by the Protestant Reformers in Bible translations.
The name "Textus Receptus" is based on then 1633 Elzevir edition but this is not the last edition.

The Byzantine texts are Greek New Testament manuscripts of the Byzantine age or modern standard texts based on those manuscripts.
The Majority text is a statistic text based on a part of the New Testament manuscripts and because the Byzantine texts have the Majority is the Majority text very Byzantine.
 

The Alexandrian texts are a small group Greek New Testament manuscripts: meanly Codex Sinaiticus and Codex Vaticanus (that is for a part also Western) from Egypt that are filled with local textual variants.
But the topic tag is about the Old Testament only
 

Edited by Katoog, 07 November 2021 - 03:05 AM.

[Silverhair]

When I want to do some studies in the OT I run the ABP {Apostolic Bible Polyglot w/ Strong's Numbers}, Brenton {Brenton's English Septuagint} & HSB {Hebrew Study Bible} in Parallel mode.

 

This works well for me.

 

 

[rebornID]

Friends.  Thanks so much for the feedback
I completely missed that Apostolic Polygot and the Brentons' english Sept.
I also downloaded the Jewish Old Testament and the Majority text which were also available in the ESword downloader.
Hopefully, I can do some comparing of textual differences using these versions.

Thanks for the replies.  

 

Edited by rebornID, 07 November 2021 - 09:30 PM.

[rebornID]

Let me float this  additional question with you before I start a new topic.  You seem to be very familiar with the available modules.

Which commentaries, if any, reflect the most unabashed critical approach to the scriptures employing all the tools of higher criticism.

It could be that ESword only seeks those tools that are faithful to the orthodox evangelical position, but if there are any commentaries that

tout their self to be more critically oriented in the offerings, please let me know.  

BTW.  maybe Is should have employed the term "technical" as a descriptor of the commentary I am looking for.  Which among the many offerings is the most technical/critical.

I, myself, am a persuaded orthodox evangelical thinker of the HR MacIntosh (early 20th century) mold, but i do like to stay in touch what

others are saying from a different angle. 

Thank you again for your assistance.

Edited by rebornID, 08 November 2021 - 08:34 PM.

[Katoog]

Every appartus that I have about the "Ending of Mark" contain errors or bias in favour for the "Short Ending".
James Snapp Jr that support the "Longer Ending" has the full information about it.

We have limits of heresies in unorthodox modules but they exist elsewere.
But is this topic about the Old Testament only?

One example of "orthodoxy" is "Virgin Birth".
This is about the "LXX editions" of Isaiah 7:14 .

The real LXX supports παρθένος, parthenos,  “virgin".
 

 

Justin’s complaint regarding the Greek translations of Aquila (A.D. 120), Symmachus (A.D. 180) and Theodotion (A.D. 180) was primarily aimed at their translation of almâ, LXX παρθένος, parthenos, usually “virgin”) as νεᾶνις (neanis, “young woman”) in Isaiah 7:14.
The men who first systematically depraved the text of Scripture, were as we now must know the heresiarchs Basilides (fl. 134), Valentinus (fl. 140), and Marcion (fl. 150): three names which Origen is observed almost[Pg 198] invariably to enumerate together.

 

 

The rest of the question belongs to the Bible Interpretations forum

[rebornID]

Attention ESword Fanatic.

I think your reply above may have been intended for a different thread (user) who may still be waiting for your reply.  
I did not ask any specific questions about Mark or about any variations of Mark's ending or any other specific variation.
If it was for me, please let me know how the discussion of Mark's ending entered into the discussion so I can follow you.

The question i did ask was sloppy and too vague.  Let me repeat it more clearly.

Just wanted a list of the best commentaries (here for esword) that deal most critically and technically with the texts. 
It does not matter if the exegesis is done from a more traditional or a more liberal set of assumptions.  I would like both.

Thanks again.
 

[Katoog]

Which commentaries, if any, reflect the most unabashed critical approach to the scriptures employing all the tools of higher criticism.

The definition of the words "higher criticism" did trigger it because the theories in "higher criticism" are made by unbelievers: so against miracles as "Virgin Birth" and against authorship of the Bible books.
Sorry for the misunderstanding if you do not know the difference between "Higher criticism" and "Lower Criticism".

https://carm.org/the...ning-the-bible/

This approach assumes a secular perspective and denies the supernatural inspiration of Scripture.  
Therefore, its conclusions must be in harmony with a secular, non-supernatural worldview.  
This automatically negates the possibility of prophecy and inspiration from God.
Higher Criticism is in contrast to Lower Criticism which is the examination of the physical texts, their origin, the reliability, and the transmission.

 

BTW.  maybe Is should have employed the term "technical" as a descriptor of the commentary I am looking for.  Which among the many offerings is the most technical/critical.

The most "technical/critical" is an apparatus with accurate data and an unbiased commentary but you mixed up the textual criticism of the Old Testament with that of the New Testament.
There is no apparatus module for the Old Testament so the best that we have are the data inside the commentaries. But there are apparatus modules for the New Testament but none is without bias.
And the Ending of Mark is the most famous example of it.

And by the way: my username is "Katoog" while yours is "rebornID" so "e-Sword Fanatic" and "New to Bible Support" are our status.

Edited by Katoog, 09 November 2021 - 10:50 AM.