Mengenal Lebih Jauh Septuagint (English)

Historical importance of the Septuagint

The importance of the Septuagint Version is shown by the following considerations:

(1) The Septuagint is the most ancient translation of the Old Testament and consequently is invaluable to critics for understanding and correcting the Hebrew text (Massorah), the latter, such as it has come down to us, being the text established by the Massoretes in the sixth century A.D. Many textual corruptions, additions, omissions, or transpositions must have crept into the Hebrew text between the third and second centuries B.C. and the sixth and seventh centuries of our era; the manuscripts therefore which the Seventy had at their disposal, may in places have been better than the Massoretic manuscripts.

(2) The Septuagint Version accepted first by the Alexandrian Jews, and afterwards by all the Greek-speaking countries, helped to spread among the Gentiles the idea and the expectation of the Messias, and to introduce into Greek the theological terminology that made it a most suitable instrument for the propagation of the Gospel of Christ.

(3) The Jews made use of it long before the Christian Era, and in the time of Christ it was recognised as a legitimate text, and was employed in Palestine even by the rabbis. The Apostles and Evangelists utilised it also and borrowed Old Testament citations from it, especially in regard to the prophecies. The Fathers and the other ecclesiastical writers of the early Church drew upon it, either directly, as in the case of the Greek Fathers, or indirectly, like the Latin Fathers and writers and others who employed Latin, Syriac, Ethiopian, Arabic and Gothic versions. It was held in high esteem by all, some even believed it inspired. Consequently, a knowledge of the Septuagint helps to a perfect understanding of these literatures.

(4) At the present time, the Septuagint is the official text in the Greek Church, and the ancient Latin Versions used in the western church were made from it; the earliest translation adopted in the Latin Church, the Vetus Itala, was directly from the Septuagint: the meanings adopted in it, the Greek names and words employed (such as: Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers [Arithmoi], Deuteronomy), and finally, the pronunciation given to the Hebrew text, passed very frequently into the Itala, and from it, at times, into the Vulgate, which not rarely gives signs of the influence of the Vetus Itala; this is especially so in the Psalms, the Vulgate translation being merely the Vetus Itala corrected by St. Jerome according to the hexaplar text of the Septuagint.

Origin of the Septuagint

According to Tradition

The Septuagint Version is first mentioned in a letter of Aristeas to his brother Philocrates. Here, in substance, is what we read of the origin of the version. Ptolemy II Philadelphus, King of Egypt (287-47 BC) had recently established a valuable library at Alexandria. He was persuaded by Demetrius of Phalarus, chief librarian, to enrich it with a copy of the sacred books of the Jews. To win the good graces of this people, Ptolemy, by the advice of Aristeas, an officer of the royal guard, an Egyptian by birth and a pagan by religion, emancipated 100,000 slaves in different parts of his kingdom. He then sent delegates, among whom was Aristeas, to Jerusalem, to ask Eleazar, the Jewish high-priest, to provide him with a copy of the Law, and Jews capable of translating it into Greek. The embassy was successful: a richly ornamented copy of the Law was sent to him and seventy-two Israelites, six from each tribe, were deputed to go to Egypt and carry out the wish of the king. They were received with great honor and during seven days astonished everyone by the wisdom they displayed in answering seventy-two questions which they were asked; then they were led into the solitary island of Pharos, where they began their work, translating the Law, helping one another and comparing translations in proportion as they finished them. At the end of seventy-two days, their work was completed, The translation was read in presence of the Jewish priests, princes, and people assembled at Alexandria, who all recognized and praised its perfect conformity with the Hebrew original. The king was greatly pleased with the work and had it placed in the library.

Despite its legendary character, Aristeas' account gained credence; Aristobulus (170-50 B.C.), in a passage preserved by Eusebius, says that "through the efforts of Demetrius of Phalerus a complete translation of the Jewish legislation was executed in the days of Ptolemy"; Aristeas's story is repeated almost verbatim by Flavius Josephus (Ant. Jud., XII, ii) and substantially, with the omission of Aristeas' name, by Philo of Alexandria (De vita Moysis, II, vi). the letter and the story were accepted as genuine by many Fathers and ecclesiastical writers till the beginning of the sixteenth century; other details serving to emphasize the extraordinary origin of the version were added to Aristeas's account" The seventy-two interpreters were inspired by God (Tertullian, St. Augustine, the author of the "Cohortatio ad Graecos" [Justin?], and others); in translating they did not consult with one another, they had even been shut up in separate cells, either singly, or in pairs, and their translations when compared were found to agree entirely both as to the sense and the expressions employed with the original text and with each other (Cohortatio ad Graecos, St. Irenæus, St. Clement of Alexandria). St. Jerome rejected the story of the cells as fabulous and untrue ("Praef. in Pentateuchum"; "Adv. Rufinum", II, xxv). likewise the alleged inspiration of the Septuagint. Finally the seventy two interpreters translated, not only the five books of the Pentateuch, but the entire Hebrew Old Testament. The authenticity of the letter, called in question first by Louis Vivès (1492-1540), professor at Louvain (Ad S. August. Civ. Dei, XVIII, xlii), then by Jos. Scaliger (d. 1609), and especially by H. Hody (d. 1705) and Dupin (d. 1719) is now universally denied.

Criticism

(1) The letter of Aristeas is certainly apocryphal. The writer, who calls himself Aristeas and says he is a Greek and a pagan, shows by his whole work that he is a pious, zealous Jew: he recognizes the God of the Jews as the one true God; he declares that God is the author of the Mosaic law; he is an enthusiastic admirer of the Temple of Jerusalem, the Jewish land and people, and its holy laws and learned men.
(2) The account as given in the letter must be regarded as fabulous and legendary, at least in several parts. Some of the details, such as the official intervention of the king and the high priest, the number of the seventy-two translators, the seventy-two questions they had to answer, the seventy-two days they took for their work, are clearly arbitrary assertions; it is difficult, moreover, to admit that the Alexandrian Jews adopted for their public worship a translation of the Law, made at the request of a pagan king; lastly, the very language of the Septuagint Version betrays in places a rather imperfect knowledge both of Hebrew and of the topography of Palestine, and corresponds more closely with the vulgar idiom of Alexandria. Yet it is not certain that everything contained in the letter is legendary, and scholars ask if there is not a historic foundation underneath the legendary details. Indeed it is likely — as appears from the peculiar character of the language, as well as from what we know of the origin and history of the version — that the Pentateuch was translated at Alexandria. It seems true also that it dates from the time of Ptolemy Philadelphus, and therefore from the middle of the third century B.C. For if, as is commonly believed, Aristeas's letter was written about 200 B.C., fifty years after the death of Philadelphus, and with a view to increase the authority of the Greek version of the Law, would it have been accepted so easily and spread broadcast, if it had been fictitious, and if the time of the composition did not correspond with the reality? Moreover, it is possible that Ptolemy had something to do with the preparation or publishing of the translation, though how and why cannot be determined now. Was it for the purpose of enriching his library as Pseudo-Aristeas states? This is possible, but is not proven, while, as will be shown below, we can very well account for the origin of the version independently of the king.

(3) The few details which during the course of ages have been added to Aristeas's account cannot be accepted; such are the story of the cells (St. Jerome explicitly rejects this); the inspiration of the translators, an opinion certainly based on the legend of the cells; the number of the translators, seventy-two (see below); the assertion that all the Hebrew books were translated at the same time. Aristeas speaks of the translation of the law (nomos), of the legislation (nomothesia), of the books of the legislator; now these expressions especially the last two, certainly mean the Pentateuch, exclusive of the other Old Testament books: and St. Jerome (Comment. in Mich.) says: "Josephus writes, and the Hebrews inform us, that only the five books of Moses were translated by them (seventy-two), and given to King Ptolemy." Besides, the versions of the various books of the Old Testament differ so much in vocabulary, style, form, and character, sometimes free and sometimes extremely literal, that they could not be the work of the same translators. Nevertheless, in spite of these divergencies the name of the Septuagint Version is universally given to the entire collection of the Old Testament books in the Greek Bible adopted by the Eastern Church.

Origin according to the commonly accepted view

As to the Pentateuch the following view seems plausible, and is now commonly accepted in its broad lines: The Jews in the last two centuries B.C. were so numerous in Egypt, especially at Alexandria, that at a certain time they formed two-fifths of the entire population. Little by little most of them ceased to use and even forgot the Hebrew language in great part, and there was a danger of their forgetting the Law. Consequently it became customary to interpret in Greek the Law which was read in the synagogues, and it was quite natural that, after a time, some men zealous for the Law should have undertaken to compile a Greek Translation of the Pentateuch. This happened about the middle of the third century B.C. As to the other Hebrew books — the prophetical and historical — it was natural that the Alexandrian Jews, making use of the translated Pentateuch in their liturgical reunions, should desire to read the remaining books also and hence should gradually have translated all of them into Greek, which had become their maternal language; this would be so much the more likely as their knowledge of Hebrew was diminishing daily. It is not possible to determine accurately the precise time or the occasions on which these different translations were made; but it is certain that the Law, the Prophets, and at least part of the other books, that is, the hagiographies, existed in Greek before the year 130 B.C., as appears from the prologue of Ecclesiasticus, which does not date later than that year. It is difficult also to say where the various translations were made, the data being so scanty. Judging by the Egyptian words and expressions occurring in the version, most of the books must have been translated in Egypt and most likely in Alexandria; Esther however was translated in Jerusalem (XI, i).

Who were the translators and how many? Is there any foundation for their number, seventy or seventy-two, as given in the legendary account (Brassac-Vigouroux, n. 105)? It seems impossible to decide definitely; the Talmudists tell us that the Pentateuch was translated by five interpreters (Sopherim, c.i.). History gives us no details; but an examination of the text shows that in general that the authors were not Palestinian Jews called to Egypt; and differences of terminology, method, etc. prove clearly that the translators were not the same for the different books. It is impossible also to say whether the work was carried out officially or was merely a private undertaking, as seems to have been the case with Ecclesiasticus; but the different books when translated were soon put together — the author of Ecclesiasticus knew the collection — and were received as official by the Greek-speaking Jews.

Subsequent history

Recensions

The Greek version, known as the Septuagint, welcomed by the Alexandrian Jews, spread quickly throughout the countries in which Greek was spoken; it was utilized by different writers, and supplanted the original text in liturgical services. Philo of Alexandria used it in his writings and looked on the translators as inspired Prophets; it was finally received even by the Jews of Palestine, and was employed notably by Josephus, the Palestinian Jewish historian. We know also that the writers of the New Testament made use of it, borrowing from it most of their citations; it became the Old Testament of the Church and was so highly esteemed by the early Christians that several writers and Fathers declared it to be inspired. The Christians had recourse to it constantly in their controversies with the Jews, who soon recognized its imperfections, and finally rejected it in favour of the Hebrew text or of more literal translations (Aquila, Theodotion).

Critical corrections of Origen, Lucian, and Hesychius

On account of its diffusion alone the hellenizing Jews and early Christians, copies of the Septuagint were multiplied; and as might be expected, many changes, deliberate as well as involuntary, crept in. The necessity of restoring the text as far as possible to its pristine purity was felt. The following is a brief account of the attempted corrections:

A. Origen reproduced the Septuagint text in the fifth column of his Hexapla; marking with obeli the texts that occurred in the Septuagint without being in the original; adding according to Theodotion's version, and distinguishing with asterisks and metobeli the texts of the original which were not in the Septuagint; adopting from the variants of the Greek Version the texts which were closest to the Hebrew; and, finally, transposing the text where the order of the Septuagint did not correspond with the Hebrew order. His recension, copied by Pamphilus and Eusebius, is called the hexaplar, to distinguish it from the version previously employed and which is called the common, vulgate, koine, or ante-hexaplar. It was adopted in Palestine.

B. St. Lucien, priest of Antioch and martyr, in the beginning of the fourth century, published an edition corrected in accordance with the hebrew; this retained the name of koine, vulgate edition, and is sometimes called Loukianos, after its author. In the time of St. Jerome it was in use at Constantinople and Antioch. C. Finally, Hesychius, an Egyptian bishop, published about the same time, a new recension, employed chiefly in Egypt.

Manuscripts

The three most celebrated manuscripts of the Septuagint known are the Vatican, "Codex Vaticanus" (fourth century); the Alexandrian, "Codex Alexandrinus" (fifth century), now in the British Museum, London; and that of Sinai, "Codex Sinaiticus" (fourth century), found by Tischendorf in the convent of St. Catherine, on Mount Sinai, in 1844 and 1849, now part at Leipzig and in part in St. Petersburg; they are all written in uncials.

The "Codex Vaticanus" is the purest of the three; it generally gives the more ancient text, while the "Codex Alexandrinus" borrows much from the hexaplar text and is changed according to the Massoretic text (The "Codex Vaticanus" is referred to by the letter B; the "Codex Alexandrinus" by the letter A, and the "Codex Sinaiticus" by the first letter of the Hebrew alphabet Aleph or by S). The Bibliotheque Nationale in Paris possesses also an important palimpsest manuscript of the Septuagint, the "Codex Ephraemi rescriptus" (designated by the letter C), and two manuscripts of less value (64 and 114), in cursives, one belonging to the tenth or eleventh century and the other to the thirteenth (Bacuez and Vigouroux, 12th ed., n. 109).

Materi ini cukup bagus. Sayang dalam versi Inggris. [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

Husada wrote:

Materi ini cukup bagus. Sayang dalam versi Inggris. [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

Cara mudah untuk membaca artikel di atas dalam bahasa Indonesia :

1. Pergunakan Google translate, pilih bahasa asal English, terjemahkan ke Indonesia

2. Minta romo Yopi terjemahkan, supaya 'imprimatur dan nihil obstat'

3. Kursus kilat bahasa Inggris.

Baiklah. Saya pilih nomor 2 saja.

Saya bilang begini, "Rom, terjemahin dong postingan Glomod Bruce di atas. Pleaseeee....".
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

Husada wrote:

Baiklah. Saya pilih nomor 2 saja.

Saya bilang begini, "Rom, terjemahin dong postingan Glomod Bruce di atas. Pleaseeee....".
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

Silahkan mo, monggo ...

Kayaknya Romo Yopi belum punya kesempatan. Mau nggak mau, suka nggak suka, akhirnya, meski dengan cara 'meraba-raba', saya simpulkan. Bahwa meski banyak kritik atas terjemahan septuaginta sebagai terjemahan atas Perjanjian Lama, namun para kritikus tidak mampu menunjukkan terjemahan yang lebih tua daripada septuaginta. Dengan demikian, ya tetap, suka nggak suka, mau nggak mau, harus menerima bahwa septuaginta adalah sumber terjemahan Perjanjian Lama yang paling kuno yang dimiliki sampai sekarang. Jadi, puas nggak puas, harus puas, paling sedikit, dipuas-puaskan.
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

Itu sudah mending, daripada menyatakan menerima langsung dari Tuhan, yang seperti mengartikan bahwa Tuhan memberikan dalam bentuk utuh, gedebug, atau sim sala bim, atau qun faya qun. Sebab, setidaknya, dengan adanya septuaginta sebagai referensi, semua peneliti dapat menelitinya, membanding-banding dengan sumber lain, memverifikasi dengan bukti-bukti lainnya, maka kembali lagi, suka nggak suka harus suka, karena tidak ada referensi yang lebih tua lagi.

Mohon tambahan penjelasan Romo Yopi.

Silahkan. [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

Septuaginta kemudian diterjemahkan ke Vulgata.

Konon Vulgata diterjemahkan ke Duoay Rheim.

Saya kepingin pake Duoay Rheim aja .... krn enggak bisa bahasa yunani ataupun latin.


Teman2 ada yang tau, beli Alkitab versi Duoay Rheim di Indonesia dimana ya ?

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

cinzano wrote:

Septuaginta kemudian diterjemahkan ke Vulgata.

Konon Vulgata diterjemahkan ke Duoay Rheim.

Saya kepingin pake Duoay Rheim aja .... krn enggak bisa bahasa yunani ataupun latin.


Teman2 ada yang tau, beli Alkitab versi Duoay Rheim di Indonesia dimana ya ?

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

Mengpa gak yang online aja, om?
di ekaristi.org kan ada.

bruce wrote:

cinzano wrote:

Septuaginta kemudian diterjemahkan ke Vulgata.

Konon Vulgata diterjemahkan ke Duoay Rheim.

Saya kepingin pake Duoay Rheim aja .... krn enggak bisa bahasa yunani ataupun latin.


Teman2 ada yang tau, beli Alkitab versi Duoay Rheim di Indonesia dimana ya ?

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

Mengpa gak yang online aja, om?
di ekaristi.org kan ada.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

Kan enggak bisa di stabilo.
Enggak bisa dibaca2 sambil tiduran.

Saya kan juga koleksi buku Mod ......


[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

Kalo ada yang online, tinggal print, kan? Saya ikut Glomod Bruce menganga seperti ini, [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

Quote :

Kan enggak bisa di stabilo.
Enggak bisa dibaca2 sambil tiduran.

Saya kan juga koleksi buku Mod ......

Mungkin sudah waktunya pakai tablet, om

bruce wrote:

Quote :

Kan enggak bisa di stabilo.
Enggak bisa dibaca2 sambil tiduran.

Saya kan juga koleksi buku Mod ......

Mungkin sudah waktunya pakai tablet, om

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

Sensasinya beda dong Mod.
Kalo pake buku : obyektif
Kalo pake tablet : subyektif


@ Mod Husada.
Saya kapok ngeprint. Dulu cari buku Katekismus Gereja Katolik penerbit Ende... karena enggak nemu saya ngeprint.
Dapat 2 ordner gede.

Membacanya kesulitan.....


[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

Ooo... jadi, bisa ngestabilo, tapi menjadi kurang praktis dibawa-bawa kemana-mana, ya? Ya, sudah. Artinya, di dunia tidak ada yang sempurna. [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

Quote :

Sensasinya beda dong Mod.
Kalo pake buku : obyektif
Kalo pake tablet : subyektif

Subjektif/objektif dalam hal apa sih om?

Oh iya, kalau pakai buku, anda tidak bisa sambil berbaring terlentang, kan? Kalau Tablet bisa.
Kalau buku tidak bisa di ruang gelap, kalau tablet bisa.

Jadi....

bruce wrote:

Quote :

Sensasinya beda dong Mod.
Kalo pake buku : obyektif
Kalo pake tablet : subyektif

Subjektif/objektif dalam hal apa sih om?

Oh iya, kalau pakai buku, anda tidak bisa sambil berbaring terlentang, kan? Kalau Tablet bisa.
Kalau buku tidak bisa di ruang gelap, kalau tablet bisa.

Jadi....

Secara obyektif artinya menjadikan sesuatu yang dapat dirasakan, dipegang tanpa tergantung oleh sang pemilik.
Secara subyektif artinya sesuatu tersebut tergantung sang pemilik.

Kalo berbentuk buku alkitab Duoay Rheim, walau berganti pemilik ... buku tetap buku.
Kalo berbentuk tablet, kan tergantung imaginasi sang pemilik.


[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

Ya sudah, kalau gitu saya persilahkan beli bukunya deh.
Harganya sekitar 550.000 cover kulit.

Silahkan pesan di [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

bruce wrote:

Ya sudah, kalau gitu saya persilahkan beli bukunya deh.
Harganya sekitar 550.000 cover kulit.

Silahkan pesan di [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

Lhaa kog amazon.
Nanti kena ongkos kirim + cukai lagi [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]


Kalo bisa di Indonesia aja Mod.




[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

Di Indonesia gak dapat om

bruce wrote:

Di Indonesia gak dapat om

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

Kalo gitu menunggu kemurahan hati Mod Husada....
Saya mau titip beliau saja.


Konon beliau sering bepergian keluar (negeri & kota)



[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

cinzano wrote:

bruce wrote:

Di Indonesia gak dapat om

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

Kalo gitu menunggu kemurahan hati Mod Husada....
Saya mau titip beliau saja.


Konon beliau sering bepergian keluar (negeri & kota)



[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

Coba titip romo paroki, siapa tahu beliau punya cadangan, punya teman yang sedang ke Roma, atau bisa dimintakan ke Keuskupan.

He he he

Menarik. Seperti terjadi tawar menawar, namun ujung-ujungnya menimpukkan ke orang ketiga, keempat, kelima, dst, dst. [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

Husada wrote:

Menarik. Seperti terjadi tawar menawar, namun ujung-ujungnya menimpukkan ke orang ketiga, keempat, kelima, dst, dst. [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

Ada aroma 'balas dendam' dalam postingan ini, he he he he

Yaaaaa, tapi memang susah, diberi yang gratis 'ogah', disuruh pesan yang mahal 'ogah', lah terpaksa diberi saran lain saja, he he he he.

PL+PBnya Katolik:

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

The Codex Vaticanus (The Vatican, Bibl. Vat., Vat. gr. 1209; no. B or 03 Gregory-Aland, δ 1 von Soden), is one of the oldest extant manuscripts of the Greek Bible (Old and New Testament), one of the four great uncial codices. The Codex is named after its place of conservation in the Vatican Library, where it has been kept since at least the 15th century. It is written on 759 leaves of vellum in uncial letters and has been dated palaeographically to the 4th century.

The manuscript became known to Western scholars as a result of correspondence between Erasmus and the prefects of the Vatican Library. Portions of the codex were collated by several scholars, but numerous errors were made during this process. The Codex's relationship to the Latin Vulgate was unclear and scholars were initially unaware of the Codex's value. This changed in the 19th century when transcriptions of the full codex were completed. It was at that point that scholars realised the text differed significantly from the Vulgate and the Textus Receptus.

Current scholarship considers the Codex Vaticanus to be one of the best Greek texts of the New Testament, with the Codex Sinaiticus as its only competitor. Until the discovery by Tischendorf of the Sinaiticus text, the Codex was unrivaled. It was extensively used by Westcott and Hort in their edition of The New Testament in the Original Greek in 1881. The most widely sold editions of the Greek New Testament are largely based on the text of the Codex Vaticanus.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Codex Vaticanus (Septuagint): 300–100 BCE, 2nd century BCE (fragments), 4th century CE (complete)

Codex Amiatinus (Vulgata): Latin, early 5th century CE, early 8th century CE (complete)

Bandingkan dengan PLnya Yahudi dan Protestan:

Aleppo Codex, Leningrad Codex and other incomplete MSS (Masoretic): Hebrew, ca. 100 CE, 10th century CE


[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

The missing text was back-translated from the Vulgate. Although based mainly on late manuscripts of the Byzantine text-type, Erasmus' edition differed markedly from the classic form of that text, and included some missing parts back translated from the Latin Vulgate.

Typographical errors (attributed to the rush to complete the work) abounded in the published text. Erasmus also lacked a complete copy of the book of Revelation and was forced to translate the last six verses back into Greek from the Latin Vulgate in order to finish his edition. Erasmus adjusted the text in many places to correspond with readings found in the Vulgate, or as quoted in the Church Fathers; consequently, although the Textus Receptus is classified by scholars as a late Byzantine text, it differs in nearly two thousand readings from the standard form of that text-type, as represented by the "Majority Text" of Hodges and Farstad (Wallace 1989). The edition was a sell-out commercial success and was reprinted in 1519, with most—though not all—the typographical errors corrected.

Jadi, TR itu sebagian khususnya kitab Wahyu malah adalah terjemahan kembali dari Vulgata (Latin) ke Greek (kebalikan dari Jerome, dari Greek ke Latin).

Berbeda dengan Codex Vaticanus yang memang aslinya dalam Greek

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

The Codex Vaticanus .... It was at that point that scholars realised the text differed significantly from the Vulgate and the Textus Receptus.

Nah, inilah masalahnya, mengapa Codex Vaticanus adalah sumber terbaik dan tertua...

The Codex Sinaiticus is older and more reliable.

Codex Sinaiticus was discovered by Constantin Tischendorf in a convent at the foot of Mount Sinai. It contains the entire Greek Bible, plus the Epistle of Barnabas and most of the Shepherd of Hermas (early Christian writings which were widely used in teaching). It is believed to be from the fourth century, but somewhat later than Codex Vaticanus. Prior to its publication Tischendorf had given a descriptive account of the manuscript with a sample of its readings in Notitia editionis Codicis Bibliorum Sinaitici auspiciis Imperatoris Alexandri II. susceptæ ... Edidit Ænoth. Frid. Const. Tischendorf, &c. (Leipsic, 1860)."

"Odd question, as both books come from the Eastern Orthodox (Greek) church. In other words, the same source.

Usually, the Codex Sinaiticus is considered to closer to the original, since it is older. Less time for scribal copying errors to accumulate. But it appears to have parts missing (which you would expect from an old document that was literally pulled from the trash bin).

Most modern English translations (other than the King James which relies exclusively on the Textus Receptus - but you knew that), do not rely on just one old copy of the Bible (like the Codex Sinaiticus) taken by itself. Most modern translations compare and contrast various ancient manuscripts to try to figure out what the original wording was most likely to be.

If it makes you feel any better, other than a few minor verses here and there, and other than a few minor variations in grammar and spelling, there isn't that much difference between ancient copies of the Bible that we have today. It is a remarkably well preserved document, considering its age."

Dead Sea Scrolls: Tanakh at Qumran; Hebrew, Paleo Hebrew and Greek(Septuagint) c. 150 BCE – 70 CE

Septuagint: Codex Vaticanus, Codex Sinaiticus and other earlier papyri; Greek 300–100 BCE, 2nd century BCE(fragments), 4th century CE(complete)

Peshitta: Syriac; early 5th century CE

Vulgate: Latin; early 5th century CE

Masoretic: Aleppo Codex, Leningrad Codex and other incomplete mss; Hebrew, ca. 100 CE, 10th century CE

Samaritan Pentateuch: Abisha Scroll of Nabus; Hebrew in Samaritan alphabet, 200–100 BCE, Oldest extant mss c.11th century CE, oldest mss available to scholars 16th century CE, only torah contained

Targum: Aramaic, 500–1000 CE, 5th century CE

Nah, mari kita lihat:

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

"Franz Anton Knittel defended the traditional point of view in theology and was against the modern textual criticism. He defended an authenticity of the Pericopa Adulterae (John 7:53–8:11), Comma Johanneum (1 John 5:7), and Testimonium Flavianum. According to him Erasmus in his Novum Instrumentum omne did not incorporate the Comma from Codex Montfortianus, because of grammar differences, but used Complutensian Polyglotta. According to him the Comma was known for Tertullian."

Various scholars have developed guidelines, or canons of textual criticism, to guide the exercise of the critic's judgment in determining the best readings of a text. One of the earliest was Johann Albrecht Bengel (1687–1752), who in 1734 produced an edition of the Greek New Testament. In his commentary, he established the rule Proclivi scriptioni praestat ardua, ("the harder reading is to be preferred").

Johann Jakob Griesbach (1745–1812) published several editions of the New Testament. In his 1796 edition, he established fifteen critical rules. Among them was a variant of Bengel's rule, Lectio difficilior potior, "the harder reading is better." Another was Lectio brevior praeferenda, "the shorter reading is better", based on the idea that scribes were more likely to add than to delete. This rule cannot be applied uncritically, as scribes may omit material inadvertently.


Brooke Foss Westcott (1825–1901) and Fenton J. A. Hort (1828–1892) published an edition of the New Testament in Greek in 1881. They proposed nine critical rules, including a version of Bengel's rule, "The reading is less likely to be original that shows a disposition to smooth away difficulties." They also argued that "Readings are approved or rejected by reason of the quality, and not the number, of their supporting witnesses", and that "The reading is to be preferred that most fitly explains the existence of the others."

For some books of the Bible, Erasmus used just single manuscripts, and for small sections made his own translations into Greek from the Vulgate.

[Ehrman 2005, "For the most part, he relied on a mere handful of late medieval manuscripts, which he marked up as if he were copyediting a handwritten copy for the printer. ... Erasmus relied heavily on just one twelfth-century manuscript for the Gospels and another, also of the twelfth century, for the book of Acts and the Epistles. ... For the [last six verses of the] Book of Revelation ... [he] simply took the Latin Vulgate and translated its text back into Greek. ..." (pp 78–79)]

Jadi, TR menjiplak dari Vulgata pada 6 ayat terakhir, dimana hanya Codex Sinaiticus, Codex Vaticanus dan Vulgata yang ada, semua naskah asli tidak ada atau sudah hilang!!!

TR yang ditulis/disalin oleh Erasmus yang:

Born c. 27 October 1466
Rotterdam, Burgundian Netherlands

Died 12 July 1536 (aged 69)
Basel, Old Swiss Confederacy

Berhadapan dengan Vulgata Jerome yang:

Born c. 347
Stridon (possibly Strido Dalmatiae, on the border of Dalmatia and Pannonia)

Died 420
Bethlehem, Palaestina Prima

Padahal, dalam suratnya kepada seorang guru bahasa Yunaninya:

In 1499, while in England, Erasmus was particularly impressed by the Bible teaching of John Colet who pursued a style more akin to the church fathers than the Scholastics. This prompted him, upon his return from England, to master the Greek language, which would enable him to study theology on a more profound level and to prepare a new edition of Jerome's Bible translation. On one occasion he wrote Colet:

"I cannot tell you, dear Colet, how I hurry on, with all sails set, to holy literature. How I dislike everything that keeps me back, or retards me".

Perhatikan ini:

The first printed edition of the Greek New Testament was completed by Erasmus and published by Johann Froben of Basel on March 1, 1516 (Novum Instrumentum omne). Due to the pressure of his publisher to bring their edition to market before the competing Complutensian Polyglot, Erasmus based his work on around a half-dozen manuscripts, all of which dated from the twelfth century or later; and only one of which was not of the Byzantine text-type. Six verses that were not witnessed in any of these sources, he back-translated from the Latin Vulgate, and he also introduced many readings from the Vulgate and Church Fathers. This text came to be known as the Textus Receptus or received text after being thus termed by Bonaventura Elzevir, an enterprising publisher from the Netherlands, in his 1633 edition of Erasmus' text. The New Testament of the King James Version of the Bible was translated from editions of what was to become the Textus Receptus. If the "Majority Text" of Hodges and Farstad is taken to be the standard for the Byzantine text-type, then The Textus Receptus differs from this in 1,838 Greek readings, of which 1,005 represent "translatable" differences.

Jelas, Codex Vaticanus, Codex Sinaiticus dan Vulgata lebih original daripada TR yang mengambil dari sana sini semua naskah asli yang ada, dan menggabungkan sesuai kemauannya Erasmus!

Pada awalnya sampai Jerome menterjemahkan kedalam bahasa Latin (Vulgata), Codex Vaticanus adalah terlengkap dan terbaik serta tertua bersama dengan Codex Sinaiticus.

Itulah sebabnya, Alkitab mereka yang Katolik Roma, terutama Vulgata, masih yang terlengkap, terbaik serta tertua (tertua karena TB milik Katolik Orthodox abad ke 9, sedangkan TR abad ke 14)!

Hanya saja, untuk saat ini, sudah ada yang hilang, namun beruntung masih punya Vulgata, bahkan Erasmus tertolong oleh Vulgata ketika menyusun TR.

Vulgata abad ke 5, Vulgata sendiri diterjemahkan dari Septuaginta, yaitu Codex Vaticanus (CV) dan Codex Sinaiticus (CS).

Yang membuat kelebihan Vulgata adalah, sebagian Septuaginta, semuanya ketika Erasmus menyusun TR, sudah banyak bagian yang hilang, hanya Vulgata sampai sekarang masih lengkap PL+PB

Itulah sebabnya Erasmus mengambil sebagian dari CV+CS, sebagian dari Vulgata dan sebagian dari TB (Text Byzantine) milik Katolik Orthodox.

TB sendiri disalin dari CV dan CS, pada abad ke 9.

TR menyalin dari kesemuanya pada abad ke 14.

TB kemungkinan dari Codex Alexandrinus, yang juga lengkap seperti Codex Vaticanus dan Codex Sinaiticus.

TR lebih banyak menyalin dari TB, ada beberapa bagian TR yang berbeda dengan CV, sedangkan yang sama dengan CV adalah WH dan Vulgata.

Hanya dalam beberapa ayat dari Kitab Wahyu dimana TR menyalin kembali dari Vulgata, karena hanya Vulgata yang masih utuh, dimana semua naskah kuno lainnya sudah banyak yang hilang/rusak.

Mengapa disalin kedalam bahasa Latin? Karena posisi bahasa Latin saat itu, adalah bahasa internasional, sama seperti bahasa Inggris saat sekarang.

Salam

Catatan: sebenarnya TR juga milik Gereja Katolik Roma, sebab Erasmus adalah Pastor Katolik Roma berkebangsaan Belanda.

Dari penjelasan diatas... ternyata Vulgata emang paling lengkap.

Jadi pilihan saya mencari douay-rheims bible yang merupakan terjemahan dari Vulgata ternyata tidak salah pilih.


Tinggal menunggu kabar kapan Mod Husada mau ke Singapore, tinggal titip beli (tentunya transfer uang bukunya juga)


[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

Coba saya cari jadwal. Nanti kalo sudah ketemu, sesegera mungkin akan saya kabari. [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]