Timeline for Leviticus 20:5 - Septuagint variant analyzed
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
9 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jul 31, 2023 at 8:44 | vote | accept | Arash Howaida | ||
| Jul 31, 2023 at 6:57 | history | edited | Saro Fedele |
edited tags
|
|
| Jul 30, 2023 at 23:24 | answer | added | Epimanes | timeline score: 0 | |
| Jul 30, 2023 at 13:11 | answer | added | Saro Fedele | timeline score: 2 | |
| Jun 27, 2023 at 3:47 | comment | added | Dottard | Some attempt to make great mileage out of these differences. The problem is, ass soon as one makes a point of one difference, another difference contradicts it. It underlines the point that one should not base a doctrine on a single text. | |
| Jun 27, 2023 at 3:26 | comment | added | Arash Howaida | @Dottard You raise an excellent point. Perhaps we shouldn't be surprised that there are version differences between two documents that are centuries apart. But question still stands in a loose sense: is it that textual criticism is the only game in town for Lev 20:5, or, is there a more hermeneutic solution to explain the LXX reading. | |
| Jun 26, 2023 at 12:27 | comment | added | Dottard | This is almost silly - there are thousands of variations between the MT and the LXX and there are numerous forms of the LXX; ie, the LXX is far from uniform. Some of these clearly used different exemplars from the MT. Indeed, the MT dates from several hundred years AD and the LXX dates from about 200 BC. | |
| Jun 26, 2023 at 9:25 | history | edited | Arash Howaida | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
deleted 12 characters in body
|
| Jun 26, 2023 at 8:24 | history | asked | Arash Howaida | CC BY-SA 4.0 |