0. Introduction
In the first century CE Koine Greek was the commonly spoken language both among Jews and among Gentiles. Even in the capital city of Rome the language was not so much Latin as it was Greek. We can tell from fragments of secular writings and from receipts that citizens of the Roman empire would conduct business in Greek moreso than they would in Latin. The goal of the New Testament authors was to reach the widest possible audience and so naturally koine Greek was the ideal choice. For similar reasons, a need arose to translate the Hebrew Bible into Greek in the second century BC so that the Scriptures could be read more widely. It was translated in Alexandria by about seventy Rabbis at the command of Ptolemy Philadelphus II and quickly became popular among Jewish converts.
1. The First Septuagint
But was this original Septuagint a translation of the entire Tanakh? Some say that only the books of Moses were translated but the Epistle of Aristeas, written in the second century BCE, mentions "the books of the law, with some few others" were to be translated. [Ep. Arist. 8.] The translation work was to be carried out by six Rabbis from each tribe of Israel. [Ibid. 11, 12.] Notice that not only the books of the Torah, but "some few others" were also translated. It is possible that "the law" signifies the entire Tanakh and that the "other books" refer to deutrocanonical texts such as Judith or the fourth book of Maccabees, which are found in our earliest complete LXX codices [though it should be noted that our earliest extant complete codices are later Christian copies from the fourth century onward, so this evidence must not be pressed]. It is generally recognized that the author of the Epistle to Aristeas was not a goy, but an Alexandrian Jew. During the second temple period, it was common to refer to the entire Tanakh as "the Torah." It is only in our modern day that Torah has become more strictly applied to the books of Moses rather than the entire Tanakh.
"R. Joshua b. Levi said: Whence is resurrection derived from the Torah? From the verse, Blessed are they that dwell in thy house: they shall ever praise thee. Selah. [Psa. 84:4] Not 'praised thee,' but they shall praise thee is stated: thus resurrection is taught in the Torah." (B. Sanhedrin 91b)
The quotation is from Psalm 84:4 and not from the books of Moses but it is called "the Torah," proving that the Rabbis used the term Torah to refer generally to the Tanakh as a whole. And again a little later on it says,
"R. Hiyya b. Abba said in R. Johanan's name: Whence do we learn resurrection from the Torah? — From the verse, Thy watchmen shall lift up the voice; with the voice together shall they sing. [Isa. 52.8] Not 'sang,' but shall sing is written: thus resurrection is derived from the Torah." (B. Sanhedrin 91b)
To prove that the resurrection is taught in the Torah, Isaiah 52:8 is cited, therefore the Rabbis used the term Torah to refer not only to the books of Moses but also all the writings of the prophets. Hence, the meaning of the Epistle of Aristeas when it says they translated ‘the law and a few other books’ is that the seventy two Rabbis translated the entire law of the Jews, the entire Hebrew Bible and also some extraneous writings. This would explain why our earliest complete codices of the Septuagint contain not only the Tanakh in their list of contents, but also the books of Maccabees and other apocryphal texts. A certain Jew named Aristobulus who lived in the second century BCE during the time when the Septuagint was being translated gives an account of what occurred. Aristobulus claims that the translation of the Septuagint by the seventy Rabbis was instigated by the great orator Demetrius Phalereus who desired to have a Greek translation of the Jewish scriptures, and that the translation took place during the reigns of the Alexandrian kings Ptolemy Lagus and Ptolemy Philadelphus II. [Proepar. Evangel. 13, 12.] Regarding the testimony of Aristobulus, Havernick concluded,
"Aristobulus could not have said that the translation of the Pentateuch alone required the time he mentions. It follows that a more comprehensive work was meant." [William Lindsay Alexander, A General Historico-Critical Introduction to the Old Testament (Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1852), pp. 302.]
The translation of the Torah into Hebrew by seventy two Rabbis surely would not have taken some forty or so years to complete. Both the number of translators and the time taken to complete the work prove that it was a translation of the entire Hebrew Bible. Dynamic translations were popular in the ancient world. The Gentiles or Goyim of the Roman Empire were often totally ignorant of Hebrew and had no way of reading the Scriptures. [The term Gentile εθνος in the NT writings is essentially a synonym with goyim in most occurrences.] The Septuagint translators took certain liberties to account for this ignorance. They often paraphrase Hebraic idioms, key terms, and phrases to make them intelligible to the average Greek reader. They also had no hesitation in adding explanatory phrases or interpretive translations. Josephus speaks about the creation of the LXX in several places,
"I found, therefore, that the second of the Ptolemies was a king who was extraordinarily diligent in what concerned learning, and the collection of books; that he was also peculiarly ambitious to procure a translation of our law, and of the constitution of our government therein contained, into the Greek tongue. Now Eleazar the high priest, one not inferior to any other of that dignity among us, did not envy the forenamed king the participation of that advantage, which otherwise he would for certain have denied him, but that he knew the custom of our nation was, to hinder nothing of what we esteemed ourselves from being communicated to others. Accordingly, I thought it became me both to imitate the generosity of our high priest, and to suppose there might even now be many lovers of learning like the king; for he did not obtain all our writings at that time; but those who were sent to Alexandria as interpreters, gave him only the books of the law, while there were a vast number of other matters in our sacred books." (Antiquities, 12.3.10)
These statements are consistent with the theory that the LXX began with a translation of the books of Moses, then progressed to the rest of the Tanakh and some few other apocryphal books. This would explain the extant codices containing these books and the similarities between their text and style.
2. Christology and Christianity
Some argue that the high Christological statements in the LXX indicate that our extant text is heavily corrupted by Christian copyists and may not be very Jewish at all. The LXX translators seem to have believed in a pre-existent angelic Messiah who would be revealed before the end of the world. The LXX of Isa. 9:6 omits the epithets "mighty God, everlasting father,"(אֵ֣ל גִּבּ֔וֹר אֲבִיעַ֖ד) and instead describes the Messiah as "the angel of great counsel." There is a clear statement of pre-existence in the LXX of Psa. 109:3 [110:3] "I have begotten you from the womb before the morning star." In Greek literature the "morning star" (εωσφόρος) refers specifically to the planet Venus, which is distinctly visible at the close of every day due to its brilliance. [Compare the LXX of Gen. 1:16; Psa. 8:3; 2Kgs. 23:5.] Even before God created the planets, stars, and other celestial bodies the Messiah was begotten. In the Hebrew text of Micah 5:1 [5:2] we read,
וְאַתָּ֞ה בֵּֽית־לֶ֣חֶם אֶפְרָ֗תָה צָעִיר֙ לִֽהְיוֹת֙ בְּאַלְפֵ֣י יְהוּדָ֔ה מִמְּךָ֙ לִ֣י יֵצֵ֔א לִֽהְי֥וֹת מוֹשֵׁ֖ל בְּיִשְׂרָאֵ֑ל וּמוֹצָאֹתָ֥יו מִקֶּ֖דֶם מִימֵ֥י עוֹלָֽם׃
"And you, O Bethlehem of Ephrath, least among the clans of Judah, From you one shall come forth To rule Israel for Me— One whose origin is from old, From ancient times."
The Hebrew text is somewhat vague and may be taken in a genealogical sense signifying the ancient bloodline of the Messiah which can be traced to the house of David. The language may also signify that the Messiah himself has ancient origins and has existed in ancient times. The LXX translators evidently understood the passage in the latter sense by translating the passage, "his goings forth were from the beginning, even from the ages," αι έξοδοι αυτού απ' αρχής εξ ημερών αιώνος. The term έξοδοι is more specific and is often used to designate the travels of kings, princes and armies. (Herod. Hist. 3.14; 7.223; 9.19) The NT uses the same term to signify the travels of Jesus and his apostles. (Lk. 9:31; 2Pet. 1:15) It is also specifically used for the exodus of the Israelites from the land of Egypt and their subsequent wandering. (Heb. 11:22) Targum Jonathan renders Micah 5:2 [5:1] this way,
וְאַתְּ בֵּית לֶחֶם אֶפְרָתָה כִּזְעֵיר הֲוֵיתָא לְאִתְמַנָאָה בְּאַלְפַיָא דְבֵית יְהוּדָה מִנָךְ קֳדָמַי יִפּוֹק מְשִׁיחָא לְמֶהֱוֵי עֲבֵיד שׁוּלְטַן עַל יִשְׂרָאֵל דִי שְׁמֵיהּ אָמִיר מִלְקָדְמִין מִיוֹמֵי עָלְמָא:
"As for you, Bethlehem Ephrath, you were too little to be numbered among the tribes of the house of Judah. From you before me the Messiah will go out to be a servant, a servant of rulership over Israel, whose name has been spoken from the beginning, from days of antiquity."
The concept of the Messiah as a pre-existent Spirit who later becomes incarnate as a man is not a distinctly Christian invention. The sages are reported to have taught that the "four smiths," seen in Zechariah 2:3 are in fact "Messiah ben David, Messiah ben Yosef, Elijah, and the righteous High Priest, who will serve in the Messianic era." (Sukkah 52b:11) For the holy prophet to have had such a vision suggests that these four figures were already in existence. Bereishit Rabbah (viii.) identifies the "Spirit of God," which is mentioned in Gen. 1:2 as the "spirit of King Messiah." In Chagigah 14a it is said that the Messiah has his own throne which stands next to the throne of God and the two commune with one another ‘one for judgment and the other for righteousness.’ The name of the Messiah is said to have existed before the universe, "The name of the Messiah was created before the world was created, as it is written about him: "May his name endure forever; his name existed before the sun." (Nedarim 39b) The Septuagint translators again seem to have followed this tradition, and rendered Psa. 72:17,
"Let his name be blessed for ever: his name shall endure forever from before the Sun (προ του ηλίου), and all the tribes of the earth shall be blessed in him: all nations shall call him blessed." (LXX)
The same language is echoed in 1 Enoch 48:2-3 "named in the presence of the Lord of spirits." And elsewhere it is said that the Son of Man has "his dwelling-place under the wings of the Lord of the Spirits" where he was kept hidden to be revealed at the appointed time. (1En. 39:6; 62:6-7; 46:1-3) This is not a mere notional or figurative pre-existence, for the Son of Man sits down upon the "throne of glory" which is beside God himself. (1En. 51:3; 45:3; 55:4; 61:8; 69:27) The concept of a heavenly throne for the Messiah was mentioned also by Rabbi Akiva,
התינח כולהי עד די כרסוון רמיו מאי איכא למימר אחד לו ואחד לדוד דתניא אחד לו ואחד לדוד דברי ר"ע א"ל ר' יוסי עקיבא עד מתי אתה עושה שכינה חול אלא אחד לדין ואחד לצדקה
The Gemara clarifies: This works out well for almost all the verses, as they describe an action taken by God, but what is there to say concerning the verse: "I beheld till thrones were placed"? The Gemara answers: One throne is for Him and one throne is for David, i.e., the messiah, as it is taught in a baraita: One throne is for Him and one throne is for David; this is the statement of Rabbi Akiva. Rabbi Yosei said to him: Akiva! Until when will you desacralize the Divine Presence by equating God with a person? Rather, the correct interpretation is that both thrones are for God, as one throne is for judgment and one throne is for righteousness. [Sanhedrin 38b.]
The Targum of 1 Chronicles 3:24 states "the sons of Elioenai: Hodaviah and Eliashib and Pelaiah and Akkub and Joḥanan and Delaiah and Anani, he is the King Messiah who in the future will be revealed, seven altogether." Anani lived hundreds of years before this Targum was written and yet the author identifies him with the Messiah. Therefore the belief of the LXX translators in the pre-existence of the Messiah does not suggest Christian forgery because such ideas were already present in Jewish tradition.
No comments:
Post a Comment