The Biblical Antiquities of Philo, with Prolegomenon

Free download. Book file PDF easily for everyone and every device. You can download and read online The Biblical Antiquities of Philo, with Prolegomenon file PDF Book only if you are registered here. And also you can download or read online all Book PDF file that related with The Biblical Antiquities of Philo, with Prolegomenon book. Happy reading The Biblical Antiquities of Philo, with Prolegomenon Bookeveryone. Download file Free Book PDF The Biblical Antiquities of Philo, with Prolegomenon at Complete PDF Library. This Book have some digital formats such us :paperbook, ebook, kindle, epub, fb2 and another formats. Here is The CompletePDF Book Library. It's free to register here to get Book file PDF The Biblical Antiquities of Philo, with Prolegomenon Pocket Guide.

Add to Cart. Have an Access Token? Enter your access token to activate and access content online. Please login and go to your personal user account to enter your access token. Have Institutional Access? Forgot your password? PDF Preview. Table of Contents. Related Content. By focusing the analysis on variant readings and textual difficulties, the study arrives at a better understanding of these manuscripts as representatives of both the text and the content of Lamentations. Author: Edward Glenny. This book offers a thorough analysis of the translation technique and theology of LXX-Amos, which will be valuable for those studying LXX-Amos and for those doing textual criticism in the Hebrew text of Amos.

It analyzes the literalness of the translation, the rendering of difficult and unknown words, and the rendering of visually ambiguous phenomena, like homonyms, homographs, and word divisions. The evidence suggests the translator worked from a text very similar to the MT. He reveals his biases as he struggles with the difficult and obscure sections of his source text. V and R, if not parent and child and probably they are not are at least uncle and nephew. Generally speaking I am of opinion that, though manifestly wrong in a number of small points, A is preferable to any one of the complete MSS.

It will be readily understood that, in an edition like this, a complete exposition of the evidence for the text is impossible: but by way of illustration we will take a short passage for which all our authorities except J are available, and in which the grouping is if imperfectly shown.

A is taken as the basis. Tenebrae et silentium erant erat RF antequam fieret seculum, et locutum est silentium et apparuerunt tenebrae. Et factum est tunc om. V est terra.


  • The Message of the New Testament (Foreword by John MacArthur): Promises Kept?
  • Global Legislation for Food Contact Materials?
  • Theory of operator algebras 1?

Et praeceptum est superiori ut plueret secundum tempus eius suum F et inferiori pracceptum est praec. F: om. Et post haec facta est tribus spiritum uestrorum nostrorum F. Et nunc molesta, esse noli tanquam secunda creatura factura VRF. Si comminus memorarer artare, etc.

Composition, Reception, and Interpretation

PPhT artare rather obscure in T. Si quominus memorare tartari tractari R in quo ambulabas VRF. Aut non audire tibi sufficit quoniam per ea quae consonant in conspectu tuo multis in multis VRF psallo? Aut immemor es quoniam de resultatione in chaoma tonata in chaomate nata VRF est uestra creatura? VRF here show themselves the best in some important readings. The first homini for omnibus is the least obvious: but it will be quickly seen that the point of the invective is that evil spirits are a secondary creation, and particularly that they are inferior to man.

If not actually created after man, at least they came into being after the earth, which was to supply food to him. Moreover, a similar variant occurs early in the book III. But VR F is rarely available are not uniformly successful. They sometimes shirk difficulties.

In IX. Here VR read "in testamentum carnis, which makes nonsense: and a few lines later, where it is said of Pharaoh's daughter: "et dum uidisset in Zaticon sc.


  • THE BIBLICAL ANTIQUITIES OF PHILO.
  • Philosophy for Understanding Theology, Second Edition.
  • Copyright:.
  • Princeton University Library Catalog.
  • Biochemical Actions of Hormones. Volume 1.
  • Pseudo-Philo - WikiVisually;

In III. When Pharaoh has determined to destroy the Hebrew children, the people say IX. Still, the word has survived. The shirking of difficulties is not confined to VR. The priestly vestments, epomis XI. In a list of the plagues of Egypt X. This word pammixia panimixia in the MSS. VR do not always go together: R, as being later, has corruptions of its own. Psalphinga , a trumpet, is a favourite word with our author: R at first writes this as psalmigraphus ; later, when he has realised that this is nonsense, he reproduces psalphinga as he should. I will give two specimens, one of a few words, the other longer, in which this is the case.

Una petra erat unde effodi patrem uestrum. P has: incisco petre illius, which is nearly right: VRF have "incisio petre illius," which is quite right. J is very loose and paraphrastic, and its evidence will be given after the rest. It will be seen that J has some equivalent for every clause though in g he has wandered far from the text.

For the rest he is too paraphrastic to be followed closely. It is very odd that three times over in this short passage the words in genua mea , genuam meam , in genuam meam should occur in one of the groups, each time disturbing the sense, while another group somehow avoids the difficulty.

It looks suspicious for the group which does so. It would justify a theory that where the words first occur they are corrupt for ingenuitate , that on the second occasion an obscurity of a few letters genu.

Samuel's Vision in Pseudo-Philo's Liber Antiquitatum Biblicarum | Howard Jacobson | Academic Room

Another blurring of a few letters would account for the differences between moysi and preciosi , and between odoris and odoramenti. But I do not regard this as a really satisfactory explanation. Quippe attuleramus commodum illud Fuldense uestrum, cum antea ex Laurissensi coenobio impetrassemus pervetustum quidem illud, et quod nobis felicissimae editionis magnam spem fecerat: sed progressos paululum non modo foede destituit, sed et fecit ut praeproperae nos editionis plurimum.

Lehmann quotes a number of instances in which Sichardus has deviated from the MS.


  • The Shikimic Acid Pathway.
  • Pseudo-Philo - Wikipedia;
  • Developmental Neuropathology.
  • - Princeton University Library Catalog Search Results.
  • Thomas Merton and the Inclusive Imagination.

This last statement applies especially, I think, to the Quaestiones. In it is preceded by Jerome's notice of Philo. Philonis antiquitatum liber ; a late title in the same MS. Sixtus Senensis has two notices of the book: in the first, which is drawn from Sichardus. The MS. V has no title at all. Thus we have authority for three names. The first, Biblicarum antiquitatum , I think, must be in part due to Sichardus; the epithet "Biblicarum" savours to my mind of the Renaissance, and has no certain MS.

The other name, de successione generationum or the like, has rather better attestation, and: Historia ab initio mundi , etc. I can hardly believe, however, that any of them are original; it seems more probable that some Biblical name was prefixed to the book when it was first issued. Rather out of respect to the first editor than for any better reason I have retained the title Biblical Antiquities , under which the text was introduced to the modern world.

Original Language. The forms of proper names, the occurrence of Greek words which puzzled the translator, ometocea , pammixia , epomis , etc. It is hardly less plain that the Greek was a translation from Hebrew. As Dr. Cohn has pointed out, the whole complexion, and especially the connecting links of the narrative, are strongly Hebraic, and there is a marked absence of the Greek use of particles, or of any attempt to link sentences together save by the bald "et," which occurs an incredible number of times. Some statistics may be given: Et factum est occurs at least 33 times; Et tum usually of the past 37; Tunc 25; Et nunc of present or future 85; In tempore illo 18; In diebus illis and the like 10; Et post haec , or postea 30; Ecce ; Ecce nunc 47; Et ideo 27; Et erit cum , or si Other common links which I have not counted are Et u t uidit , etc.

Philo's Occultic Background gave us the "Trinity"

The leading Hebraisms are present: adiicere , or apponere with another verb, meaning "he did so yet again," 9 times at least; the intensive participle and verb Illuminans illuminaui 15 times. We have Si introducing a question 4 times; a uiro usque ad mulierem and the like XXX. Hebraists, among whom I cannot reckon myself, may probably detect the presence of plays upon words, passages written in poetical form some of which are indeed obvious , and mistranslations.

The Birth of Moses: Between Bible and Midrash

From what has just been said it will be rightly gathered that the literary style of Philo is not its strong point. Indeed, it is exceedingly monotonous, full of repetitions and catchwords. The author's one device for obtaining an "effect" is to string together a number of high-sounding clauses, as he does, for example, in his repeated descriptions of the giving of the Law.

As a narrator, he has another trick. An incident is often compared to another in the past or future history of Israel, and many times is an episode from that history related in a speech or prayer. Some of the recurrent phrases are: I spake of old saying about 25 times; in vain , or not in vain 14; it is better for us to do this than. Of single words accipere occurs 88 times in the first half of the text; habitare , inhabitare about 80 times in the whole text; iniquitas 33; disponere 37; testamentum 47; ambulare 21; uia , uiae 25; adducere 19; seducere 21; saeculum 27; sempiternus 15; constituere 20; expugnare 27; zelari 14; illuminare 12; renunciare In VIII.

It seems clearly to be a mistake for "and Isui. See the Appendix on Readings in loc. As to the DATE of the book, a positive indication of a terminus a quo has been detected in the text by Dr. Now that day was the 17th day of the 4th month. Cohn's comment is: "These words are meant to signify that Jerusalem was taken on the 17th of Tamuz, on the same day on which the Tables of the Law were broken by Moses.

The capture of Jerusalem by the Babylonians, however, took place on the 9th of Tamuz Jer. Seder Olam Rabbah , cap. Thus the author betrays himself by giving as the date of the capture of Jerusalem by the Babylonians what is really the date of the capture by Titus. The point is so important that I have felt it only right to present the evidence in some detail. The Mishnah of Taanith IV.