Skip to main content

Isaiah 3:10 (Septuagint)

I love the biblical text. I also love learning about how it was transmitted and what sorts of alterations occurred in this process. The Septuagint, one strand of the transmission of the biblical text, offers numerous interesting readings. This first installment of "Versional Readings" comes from the book of Isaiah.

Isa 3:10—εἰπόντες Δήσωμεν τὸν δίκαιον, ὅτι δύσχρηστος ἡμῖν ἐστιν· τοίνυν τὰ γενήματα τῶν ἔργων αὐτῶν φάγονται.  

". . . saying, 'Let us bind the just, for he is a nuisance to us.' Therefore they shall eat the fruit of their works" (New English Translation of the Septuagint).

Isa 3:10—אמרו צדיק כי טוב כי פרי מעלליהם יאכלו

"Tell the innocent how fortunate they are, for they shall eat the fruit of their labors" (New Revised Standard Version).

At the outset, one should know that the relation of the Hebrew text of Isaiah (as we know it in modern editions) to the Septuagint version is particularly complicated. The Septuagint version has been described as reflecting a "free" translation; however, there is a certain level of literalness. The translator has been accused of poor knowledge of Hebrew, which may be true, but his translation often does appear to have a basis in the Hebrew text (of modern editions). This particular reading may serve as a good example of how the translator produces a translation with both freeness and a certain level of literalness. The translator exhibits literalness in following the general order of the Hebrew; however, the translator shows freeness in adding "to us" and his translation choice of "therefore" (τοίνυν never translates Hebrew כי anywhere else that I could find). 

There are two other differences that merit further comment. One is another "plus" element in the Greek compared to the Hebrew ("Let us bind"), and one apparent contextual change ("fortunate" to "nuisance"). Two possible textual explanations come to my mind. The Septuagint translator may have had a different text (i.e., אמר נאסר: "saying, 'let us bind . . .'"), or he may have possibly produced a double rendering, which did occur from time to time. If the translator did indeed have a different text, then at some point in the process of the transmission of the Hebrew text, נאסר was accidentally omitted because of a common scribal error called homoioteleuton (i.e., "similar ending"). In this case, the scribe would have skipped from ר to ר (which requires that a scribe also added a ו at some point). This resulted in the skipping of נאסר (as follows: אמר נאסר, or אמר). This suggests that the subsequent change in the verse (i.e., "good/fortunate" to "nuisance") was likely an adaptation to this new context. In other words, since the wicked are seen to be devising a harmful plan against the righteous, they must be seen to be speaking derisively about the righteous ("for he is a nuisance" instead of "for he is good/fortunate"). If, instead, the Septuagint reading reflects a double rendering, it would have been produced on the basis of the single Hebrew verb (i.e., אמרו). (I can get into double renderings another time.) In the case of a double rendering, the subsequent change to "nuisance" could likewise reflect a contextual adaptation. Whatever the case, what we have in the Septuagint of Isaiah is a slightly different interpretation, which does make good sense in the context. Following the woe against the wicked of vv. 8 and 9, the Septuagint translator interpreted the text to be a statement of the plan of the wicked.

The variants mentioned above result in an interesting difference between the Greek and Hebrew in the latter part of the verse as well. In the Greek, the wicked "shall eat the fruit of their works." In the Hebrew, the righteous, or "innocent," "shall eat the fruit of their labors." Both teachings are biblical (cf. Rom 2:6 ff.), but it is interesting to observe this slight change in the biblical text. Which version is authoritative? As I said, both are in line with the canon (i.e., rule) of biblical teaching observed in other texts, but what can we learn from differences like this, particularly since NT writers often relied on the Septuagint Scriptures?
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Rejoice?

Ps 2:11—"Serve the LORD with fear, and rejoice with trembling" ( ESV ). "Rejoice" is a fairly common word in the Bible. In the NRSV , the English word "rejoice" occurs 280 times. This number is reduced to 268 occurrences in the KJV . It is further reduced to 233 in the ESV . In the ESV , the word "rejoice" is used in the Psalms more than twice the number of times compared to the biblical book with the next most occurrences (i.e., Isaiah). The English word actually translates several different Hebrew terms, which partly explains why there is a difference in the number of occurrences of the word "rejoice" in English Bibles (i.e., versions differ in how consistently they render a given Hebrew word, or they consistently use a different English equivalent for a given Hebrew word). The Hebrew root underlying "rejoice" in Ps 2:11 is גיל (also, for those interested, the word  nagila  in the song "Hava Nagila" [i.e., ...
4 comments
Read more

Shepherd or Shatter?

Ps 2:9—"You shall break them with a rod of iron" The term usually translated "break" in English Bibles has an interesting rendering in the Septuagint. In the Septuagint, we find, "You will shepherd them with a rod of iron." The explanation is simple enough. In unpointed script the Hebrew could be understood as "break" or "shepherd." That is to say, תרעם could be derived from רעע ("break," or "shatter"; cf. Job 34:24), or רעה ("shepherd," "lead," "rule"; cf. Mic 7:14, which has a very similar construction). The context, at first blush, appears to favor the sense of "break." Because repetition is a well-known literary device in Hebrew poetry, and because the second part of verse 9 reads, "You will dash them in pieces," it would make sense for the first line of the verse to have a similar meaning, namely, "break" or "shatter." It may very well be...
2 comments
Read more

Planted or Transplanted?

Psalm 1:3—"He will be like a tree  planted  by streams of water that bears its fruit in its season, and whose leaves do not wither. He will prosper at whatever he does." The word שָׁתוּל is usually translated, "planted," in English translations; however, there may be an exegetical point in this lexical choice. The psalmist could have used נתע to convey the meaning "plant." Though the verb שׁתל can also mean "plant" (Hos 9:13), it often takes on the nuanced meaning "transplant"—that is, to move something from its natural, or original, habitat to another location (see esp. Ezek 17 and 19). The translational challenge is observable in differences between Jerome's translation on the basis of the Greek (Origen's Hexaplaric recension) and his later translation on the basis of the Hebrew. His initial translation is  plantatum est  ("is planted") ,  which translates the Greek πεφυτευμένον; however, he later adjusts his trans...
Post a Comment
Read more