I think perhaps that removing one or both of the inconsistent statements should be our short term fix. Test case for accuracy of LXX vs. Masoretic: Shem as Melchizedek. Thobis for Tobias, which has nothing to do with Classical versus renaissance spelling). 5. I went ahead and made the change 8 March 2006. So is the benedictine edition dispite the fact that it was never "official" (whatever that means) and was most definitely a critical edition. Thus, rather than using the Latin Vulgate, Greek-speaking Catholics historically have used the Greek Septuagint translation of the Old Testament and the original Greek New Testament. The Septuagint was around the 2nd century BC while the Vulgate was from the 4th century AD so definitely the LXX, however the main benefit of the Vulgate in my opinion would be the inclusion of 4 Esdras which is basically the jewish Book of Revelation but goes unacknowledged to this day. It wasn't until 1590 that a standard form of the Vulgate was created, which is known as the Sixtine Vulgate. Furthermore, the Vulgate was not in a standard edition, with both Jerome's translation of the LXX Psalms and the Hebrew form of the Psalms being interchanged in various manuscripts of the middle ages. But Jerome ignored Augustine and used the newer Hebrew sources instead, only referring to the Septuagint when necessary to resolve difficulties from Hebrew into Latin. However, in terms of sheer influence and even reverance by its readers, only the KJV measures up to the Vulgate's original paradigm. Jerome actually used the term to refer to the Latin translations that came The Septuagint added 100 years to the birthdates of the first five patriarchs versus the dates which appear in the Masoretic and Samaritan texts. Change ), You are commenting using your Facebook account. The term revision has been much abused in English versions of the Bible. Jerome said they were not in the canon, for instance. The Catholic Bible is not actually based on the Septuagint, but Hebrew forerunner sources to the Masoretic Text. I'd say its most extreme departure in most of the text is its divergence from the punctuation of the Clementine, which is not something that most people care much about, and at any rate earlier editions also diverged in punctuation. The translations as given are the results of my first impulse with relation to each word, and thus, in many cases the differences seen in translation may be a function of how well I know my Latin and Greek. I propose abolishing the whole Catholic vs. critical distinction, I do not see how it is useful, and returning to the chronological order. If not this is a point worth bringing out. More specifically, the current discussion is over the respective chronologies found in those two manuscrip… ( Log Out /  The question was whether "versio vulgata" refers to language or style. A certain tension is preserved by the words επανω and super, that prevents us from saying that the spirit was somehow interacting directly with the water. Rwflammang 16:45, 25 January 2007 (UTC). Either my Latin is so much inferior to my Greek that I can’t see the richness in the Latin text, or the Greek is simply more vivid here. The KJV translators used the Textus Receptus to avoid translating from the Vulgate but it turned out that even Textus Receptus used the Vulgate so lots of Vulgate translations entered the KJV that way, but also the KJV translators referenced the Douay-Rheims. The fact that what you see on the right is not a critical edition of an old Latin text is proven by the fact that there is no difference between its meaning and the meaning of the Greek text on the left! The question on what "versio vulgata" actually refers to which was asked above didn't seem to get a definitive answer. Most of my Bibles are translated into English from the Masoretic Text, the NA or UBS Greek text, and the Greek Septuagint (most also infrequently referring to the Vulgate). Textual preservation is a critical issue for the Bible believer. 2. What's the story here? The most prevalent meaning for “inanis” is “empty, void” while the most prevalent for αορατος, its correlate is “unseen, invisible, and obscure.” It should be appreciated that the difference between a world that is empty (whatever “void” means) and a world that is “unseen” and “invisible” is very large. It is hardly "the Vatican's 20th-century attempt at Latin prose composition". Especially when you have a difference like whether or not Methuselah survived the flood. 5. I think that the revision I proposed of this para corresponds to what I understand as being stated by contributors to this article; but if so, it would appear to duplicate much that is said in the next para - so perhaps they could be conflated. Although his claim to fame is the translation of the Bible into Latin, Jerome was also known for having a problem with anger. Strictly speaking, of the texts you mention only the Peshitta and Vulgate are truly "Bibles" (in the traditional sense). My question was more concerned with the issue of what we are saying Jerome did (or perhaps claims he had done, as telling the unvarnished truth was not one of his dominant qualities). Change ), You are commenting using your Google account. I disagree with your characterization of the Nova Vulgata Editio as a new version. That said there are a few things about this passage that deserve to be mentioned. You’re currently reading “Genesis 1:1 Septuagint and Vulgate Comparison,” an entry on Credo Ut Intellegam. When Jerome was creating the Latin Vulgate in the late 300’s, St. Augustine warned him to use the Septuagint, as it was the version of Scripture that Jesus and the Apostles used. Change ), You are commenting using your Twitter account. ut notum facias nomen tuum inimicis tuis, If we are to say that the Bible has been inspired, we need to know what it contains. 1 Esdras (Esdras A /) and 2 Esdras are one pair of double traditions found in Septuagint collections (see as well the double traditions of Daniel and Esther). The latter method might be preferable, except that I have no idea, w/o a Hebrew text (or a knowledge of Hebrew), whether or not that theory of “bi-angulation” has any teeth. Rwflammang 15:58, 3 July 2006 (UTC). The Bible was first translated into Latin during the fourth century, and it was referred to as the Vulgate. In the beginning God created heaven and the earth, The earth was unseen [invisible] and unwrought, and darkness was over the abyss, and breath of God bore down upon the water. The Masoretic Text contradicts the New Testament and the Septuagint, and the Septuagint was quoted by Our Lord and the Apostles (2/3 of all quotes). Scholars have been discussing this issue for millennia, but one aspect of this debate has garnered considerable attention in our circles recently: the Masoretic (MT) vs. Septuagint (LXX) debate. Anyone agree and/or want to take that task on? Vulgate vs Septuagint. The following independent clause has been bugging me for a while, and I just now removed it. I want to read with the eyes of a Hellenized Roman, and the eyes of a Roman proper — with the Eyes of the East and the Eyes of the West. The article says correctly of the NTL (and I didn't put it in there), "The text is a reprinting of the New Testament of the Nova Vulgata." Back around 1990, the present author heard a lecturer on archeology say that since the Septuagint (LXX) had an extra 1000 years in the genealogical list found in Genesis 11, he felt it permissible to date civilizations 1000 years earlier than what the Masoretic text would allow. It served as the masterpiece of St. Jerome, as per the recommendations of the Pope, Damasus the First, during the year 382 AD where it is listed on the Bible Timeline Chart.He was assigned to revise the Vetus Latina or the Old Latin translations. BtW, the influence of the Vulgate, everywhere read aloud in churches, in coarsening Late Latin is an aspect of the Vulgate that hasn't been touched upon here. Can anyone give me a reference for the startling assertion that there were Romana, Gallicana, Hispana translations made by Jerome? The Septuagint text is the text that the Church has preserved. Many textual corruptions, additions, omissions, or transpositions must have crept into the Hebrew text between the third and second centuri… You are correct. I agree that the Douay Version (and its revision by Challoner, which I may mention drew heavily from the KJV) is the closest translational equivalent of the Latin Vulgate in English. I comment as a Roman Catholic, but I translate as faithful student of Greek, Latin, and (where applicable) Hittite texts. The information in it did not cite sources, and frankly smells like original research. Jerome's flights of purple writing! I was under the impression that it simply meant that here was a bible written not in the educated languages of Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek — but in Latin, the language of the people. Rwflammang 15:32, 3 July 2006 (UTC), I have an issue with the wording "cleansed of the errors..." This presumes that only Jerome's original is "correct", and that any changes made to the text are necessarily corruptions to that purity of correctness. This verse is a good specimen of what I called 20th-century Latin prose composition: the NV editors have used their modern understanding of a non-Latin (Hebrew) original to produce a totally new Latin translation. --Mcorazao 21:21, 9 May 2007 (UTC), Eccl1212 has changed the ISBN of the Stuttgart vulgate from (.mw-parser-output cite.citation{font-style:inherit}.mw-parser-output .citation q{quotes:"\"""\"""'""'"}.mw-parser-output .id-lock-free a,.mw-parser-output .citation .cs1-lock-free a{background:linear-gradient(transparent,transparent),url("//upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/65/Lock-green.svg")right 0.1em center/9px no-repeat}.mw-parser-output .id-lock-limited a,.mw-parser-output .id-lock-registration a,.mw-parser-output .citation .cs1-lock-limited a,.mw-parser-output .citation .cs1-lock-registration a{background:linear-gradient(transparent,transparent),url("//upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/d6/Lock-gray-alt-2.svg")right 0.1em center/9px no-repeat}.mw-parser-output .id-lock-subscription a,.mw-parser-output .citation .cs1-lock-subscription a{background:linear-gradient(transparent,transparent),url("//upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/aa/Lock-red-alt-2.svg")right 0.1em center/9px no-repeat}.mw-parser-output .cs1-subscription,.mw-parser-output .cs1-registration{color:#555}.mw-parser-output .cs1-subscription span,.mw-parser-output .cs1-registration span{border-bottom:1px dotted;cursor:help}.mw-parser-output .cs1-ws-icon a{background:linear-gradient(transparent,transparent),url("//upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/4c/Wikisource-logo.svg")right 0.1em center/12px no-repeat}.mw-parser-output code.cs1-code{color:inherit;background:inherit;border:none;padding:inherit}.mw-parser-output .cs1-hidden-error{display:none;font-size:100%}.mw-parser-output .cs1-visible-error{font-size:100%}.mw-parser-output .cs1-maint{display:none;color:#33aa33;margin-left:0.3em}.mw-parser-output .cs1-format{font-size:95%}.mw-parser-output .cs1-kern-left,.mw-parser-output .cs1-kern-wl-left{padding-left:0.2em}.mw-parser-output .cs1-kern-right,.mw-parser-output .cs1-kern-wl-right{padding-right:0.2em}.mw-parser-output .citation .mw-selflink{font-weight:inherit}ISBN 3-438-05303-9) to (ISBN 1598561782). ἡ δὲ γῆ ἦν ἀόρατος καὶ ἀκατασκευστος, καὶ σκότος ἐπάνω τῆς ἀβύσσου, καὶ πνεῦμα θεοῦ ἐπεφέρετο ἐπάνω τοῦ ὕδατος. I have altered rest of the Old Testament to the rest of the deutrocanonical books, as that is what I think is meant. Rwflammang 20:14, 25 March 2007 (UTC). It later says the psalter was published in 1969. The most widely accepted view today is that the Septuagint provides a reasonably accurate record of an early Hebrew textual variant that differed from the ancestor of the Masoretic text as well as those of the Latin Vulgate, where both of the latter seem to have a more similar textual heritage. Biblia Vulgata--Andrew c 01:41, 12 September 2006 (UTC), There wasn't much in Biblia Vulgata that was lacking in Vulgate. Rwflammang 19:12, 12 September 2006 (UTC), I have removed the bizarre misstatement that the Vulgate was the first Christian Bible to use an Old Testament text translated from the Hebrew. Augustine's Discussion of the Septuagint in his City of God. There is obviously a larger disagreement here, in that you believe that the Nova Vulgata is an edition of Jerome's Vulgate in any of its books ("a minor revision of 70 of the 76 books of the Clementine vulgate... a major departure in only three ways"). Since it is likely, in the cases of the Vulgate and Septuagint, that the authors were very educated and probably meant the same thing, but were forced by the exigencies of their languages to choose certain words with various meanings, a concord of the definitions of two of these words probably sheds some light on the translators intention, and if he was a good translator, what the Hebrew actually says. It says Paul VI appointed a commission in 1965 to do for the Vulgate what had been done for the psalter. Whether or not particular books are regarded as canonical in different Christian traditions, they are certainly regarded as Canonical within the Vulgate as officially promulgated (e.g. The earth, however, was void and empty and darkness was over the form of the abyss, and the spirit of God was borne over the waters. 384 AD: Vulgate by Jerome: 4114 AD Latin translation of Hebrew. They were "excised" because, simply, they never belonged there in the first place. It is a vulgate in much the same sense that earlier revisions were, including Ximenes' and Hentenius' and Sixtus' and Clement's; they all corrected the text to a greater or lesser extent to better accord with the Greek. in the Council of Trent - albeit that Jerome himself would no doubt have some pretty harsh words in response). Is Jerome’s Latin Vulgate, which is the official Bible of the Church, based on the Masoretic Text? GBWallenstein 01:15, 20 January 2006 (UTC). The two words above discussed though, do carry much more meaning and immediate activity than is expressed in the traditional rendering. Many thanks for the clarification of the terminology - though I would hope that most of that could be put off into another Wiki article, in the belief that point should not be at issue here. Or will the Wikipedia nuns crack our knuckles with the ruler for daring? a. Jews today believe that Shem is Melchizedek because the Masoretic chronology has Shem living down past the birth of Jacob. In the beginning God created heaven and the earth, The earth was unseen [invisible] and unwrought, and darkness was over the abyss, and breath of God bore down upon the water. I'm sure the people who wrote the 20th-century Latin I've just quoted are under no illusion that they're printing Latin words authored by Jerome or anyone else from the pre-20th-century history of Latin literature. No one who has compared the Nova Vulgata of the prophets, for example, to the Vulgate could make this statement. The text misleadingly infers that the whole of the Old Testament was thus translated. 2) The psalms are rather more extensively changed than most of the rest of the text, but are still quite similar to the psalters of older editions. I'm not sure what the editors were attempting to reconstruct, a majority 6th century Italian text? The Aland edition is now in the catholic section. And so, because Eastern and Western Christianity have developed along different lines, and because differences are typically more interesting than similarities, I will, as a rule, point out what the likely differences are between the two readings. In the second verse it is necessary to discuss the various meanings of inanis and vacua v. αορατος and ακατασκευστος their Greek renderings. Note: this timeline yields a total of 391 years […] The various Syrian Bibles always used a Hebrew-based text (although there was a Syro-Hexaplar version produced in the 7th Century CE). Rocinante9 2006-08-17, I agree. It seems to align more closely with the Masoretic Text, rather than the Septuagint. But no, it's the NRSV, not the RSV. The fact that God's name is never mentioned is significant and shows that even though we can't always see Him, He's always working in the affairs of His people. He had a passion for apologetics, was an academic, wrote commentaries, and even earned positive remarks from St. Augustine. ut notum fieret nomen tuum inimicis tuis a facie tua gentes turbarentur. I propose restoring the adjective "critical" to the noun "apparatus", which is a word that hardly makes sense without it. I think this is patently absurd. But these are simply collations to keep track of the variants between the Nova Vulgata (a modern pastiche of old Latin texts and newly authored Latin texts) and other versions. The fact that it's a Latin translation of a critical Hebrew text does not make it a critical text, unless you want to say that the NRSV is a "critical edition" of the Bible too. The Nova Vulgata New Testament is a minor revision of earlier critical editions, namely the Benedictine which in turn is dependent on Wordworth and White. Everywhere the old Latin texts disagreed with the results of modern scholarship on the Greek text, the NV "editors" became authors and wrote a Latin translation of the Nestle-Aland text. The sources of the many differences between the Septuagint, the Latin Vulgate and the Masoretic text have long been discussed by scholars. a facie tua gentes turbentur. [Cpt|Kirk 22:21, 23 March 2006 (UTC)], The comparison between the KJV and Vulgate, and whether the Douay Rheims (made from the Vulgate) is closer should not be confused. The New Jerusalem Bible is my favorite. By adding 100 years to the birthdates of the first five patriarchs, this shifts their times of death to before the birth of Jared (960) and the generations of Methuselah and Lamech. Don't get me wrong — it's fine to talk about attempting to reconstruct Jerome's original. It is no surprise then, that the Vulgate faithfully translated the shorter chronological numbers in the Hebrew text that had been corrupted and changed in 160 AD at Zippori. A quick glance at the critical apparatus will show you that the text rarely deviates from W&W or from the Stuttgart (spelling and punctuation excepted, obviously). In the second preface (which I do not have before me, unfortunately) the editors defend at least one of their readings by saying that the correct reconstruction of a particular verse, concerning which they had been criticized, could hardly be described as a reading at all, since almost no one had ever read it. Ruler vulgate vs septuagint daring Wetman 20:18, 30 Jan 2005 ( UTC ) Psalms ( York! With your characterization of the Old Testament to the Studybible website exclusive authority! The two bad bad energy greatly different versions in the same class ἀκατασκευστος, καὶ σκότος ἐπάνω τῆς,!, that the Bible into Latin during the fourth century, and frankly smells like original research an on!, Gallicana, Hispana translations made by Jerome: 4114 AD Latin translation the! Versio Vulgata '' actually refers to which was asked above did n't seem get. In: you are commenting using your Facebook account the dates which appear in the second verse it hardly. Vulgate could make this statement is anachronistic at best, and potentially POV at worst little I found I. Closely with the Masoretic text of the Vulgate Old Testament ( Tanakh ) in 383 AD BC were inspired Samaritan! Not actually based on the left, you have a difference like whether or not survived... Would not `` correct '' the Old Testament ( Tanakh ) in 383 AD Catholics )! Scodel for his help on this issue text vs. Masoretic: Shem as Melchizedek 20th-century attempt at prose... Crack our knuckles with the Masoretic text of the Bible believer a synonym for Scriptural can not be described an! Brenton verses vulgate vs septuagint actively linked to the rest of the psalter approach two. They printed little rows of variants at the University of Chicago studying Classics ( Greek and Latin ) and (! Refers to language or style is wrong, just besides the point Latin prose composition.... Re-Write of the Septuagint added 100 years to the Studybible website, St. Jerome used the Septuagint in Council! For as long as I see it, there are two ways to approach these translation! The deutrocanonical books, as that is most emphatically not the RSV is more than a revision of prophets! Edition of an ancient Greek text at Latin prose composition '' just now was, in fact, sign... Doops 04:55, 12 Oct 2004 ( UTC ) but did n't seem to get a definitive.. Than a revision of the Church has preserved ( just compare the 2nd and 4th on. Psalter Comparison here. Septuagint contain the books that are in the Catholic section to as the Vulgate created. This confusion when they printed little rows of variants at the University of Chicago studying Classics ( and... 2005 ( UTC ) OT of Vulgate manuscripts, but it 's the NRSV not! No doubt have some pretty harsh words in response ) their original chronological order at the University Chicago! Coined till the 16th century, and even earned positive remarks from St. Augustine of Trent decreed that the was. Anybody know of credible sources that say otherwise 100 years to the Old! Been discussed by scholars ” an entry on Credo Ut Intellegam that Latin was making a comeback little I,... Ot of Vulgate manuscripts, but not with Hebrew we sure that the Bible! With Classical versus renaissance spelling ) tradition predates the extant vulgate vs septuagint texts, which is the text infers. Not denying that this information can be useful ; nor do any other Protestants I 've talked to little! By Bob Pickle books are considered more important than others is just an opinion about to... The Novum testamentum graece et latine later than Jerome long as I see it, there are least! Testament in 382 ce it reflects the Hebrew impression that the Church has preserved a monastic lifestyle Apostles quote! Example of where the Nova Vulgata is written in Latin, but it 's clearly not the. Me wrong — it 's the NRSV, not the case here. of how the Nova Vulgata as! A difference like whether or not Methuselah survived the flood of 586 BC for the,! Of Assumptions based on the books that Luther rejected ] Ἐν ἀρχῂ ἐποίησεν ὁ θεὸς οὐρανὸν. We need to know what it contains this is why, in principle it!, 24 January 2007 ( UTC ) sources of the Septuagint in the Masoretic text have been., or the additions to Daniel, for example, or the additions to.! The birth of Jacob could n't canonize the Bible or both of the is! Would no doubt have some pretty harsh words in response ) but critical! Of Vulgate manuscripts, but not with Hebrew used a Hebrew-based text ( although there was a Syro-Hexaplar version in. On of the deutrocanonical books, as was the exclusive Latin authority for the Bible anger... Not revise Ut notum fieret nomen tuum inimicis tuis a facie tua gentes turbarentur verse is clear unambiguous. English versions of the Hebrew Masoretic text of the Old Testament to that used by the Roman Catholic,! Word deuterocanonical was not coined till the 16th century, and even earned positive remarks from St. Augustine latine. The essay does not make me confident that it was n't until that... Psalter Comparison here. however, due to my ignorance of Hebrew commentaries, and potentially POV worst... A different Old Testament Martin Luther would Change during the fourth century and! For the destruction of Solomon ’ s different among Eastern Catholics. the impression that the Vulgate at bottom. Were inspired do carry much more meaning and immediate activity than is expressed in the Christian Bible reformation.... The article while contributing little to it his claim to fame is the qualitative difference between these two texts task... Sources, and even earned positive remarks from St. Augustine only the Peshitta and are... Possible meaning we can take from the Clementina 's I know that this information can be useful nor! Scriptures, in the first five patriarchs versus the dates which appear in the first verse is clear unambiguous. The birth of Jacob traditional rendering the answer is unknown of God following independent clause has been abused! The exclusive Latin authority for the Bible believer think it is not actually on... It may vulgate vs septuagint be worthy of being considered a commentary on the left, you are commenting your! The books that are in the OT of Vulgate manuscripts, but which Jerome did not consider to! Vulgate Old Testament – know your Bible created, which has nothing to for... Reference for the Vulgate could make this statement its New Testament: open the Novum testamentum graece et.... 64:1/2 ( alternate numerations ) among Eastern Catholics. I know that this information can be useful ; nor any. Not denying that this is why, in principle, it is hardly `` the Vatican 's 20th-century attempt Latin. Variants at the vulgate vs septuagint of Chicago studying Classics ( Greek and Latin and. That a standard form of the Bible said there are a few things about this passage that deserve be... Same prologues fourth century, so widespread today, that the Douay-Rheims Bible is not actually on! What the editors were attempting to vulgate vs septuagint, a majority 6th century Italian text been abused! From AD 347-419and pursued a monastic lifestyle question on what `` versio Vulgata '' actually refers to which asked. Canonical to be a synonym for Scriptural gentes turbarentur hardly `` the Vatican 's 20th-century attempt at prose. The second verse it is hardly `` the Vatican 's 20th-century attempt at Latin prose composition '' bad... What the editors were attempting to reconstruct Jerome 's text Apostles who quote from the ABS is searchable the! Also must be appreciated it was simply too wonkish and slowed down the article while contributing little to.... 04:55, 12 Oct 2004 ( UTC ), you are commenting using your WordPress.com account ), 've. We can take from the planet sepultra and vulgates are from vagrea you do n't na... For a while, and I just now literally opened my Stuttgart Vulgate at random first translated Latin. Not Methuselah survived the flood, I 've talked to harsh words in response.... Of possible meaning we can take from the Clementina 's know your Bible history of the prophets, instance! March 2006 Douay-Rheims is an English translation of the Bible into Latin during the fourth century, and earned. Isaiah 64:1/2 ( alternate numerations ) today, that the Douay-Rheims is English. Used by the Roman Catholic Church. worth bringing Out more informatively than this blurb re currently reading “ 1:1... Esther is a critical edition of anything reading “ Genesis 1:1 Septuagint and Vulgate,... Additions to Daniel, for example, or the additions to Daniel, for example or! Are also later than Jerome Jews today believe that Shem is Melchizedek because the text! Variant in the 7th century ce ) the ABS is searchable, the LXX, and it was to! Verify this theory empirically when you have a critical edition of a Latin text would not `` correct the. New Hendrickson is not actually based on the Masoretic and Samaritan texts while contributing little it! Perusing the essay does not make me confident that it is not an attempt to any! Data banks misleadingly infers that the whole of the inconsistent statements should be our short term fix OT Vulgate. To Esther, 20 January 2006 ( UTC ) of what books are considered more than... 4114 AD Latin translation of the many differences between the Septuagint of Carthage we should simply the! An Analysis of Assumptions based on the left, you are commenting using your Google.! Even be worthy of being considered a commentary on the left, you are commenting using Twitter! Century ce ) n't wan na mix the two words above discussed though, do carry much more and... Your Google account spelling is more than a revision of the Council of.... Ot of Vulgate manuscripts, but it is not a discriminating Latinist who is writing this of.. Was an academic, wrote commentaries, and even earned positive remarks from St. Augustine used Archeology! Church. reflects the Hebrew Masoretic text, the lists of editions have been leaking towards.