# introductions

introduction:
<h3>INTRODUCTION</h3>
<p>
This book is a compilation of three major works in the Koine Greek language: the Septuagint, New Testament, and Apocrypha. 
</p>

<h4>The Old Testament</h4>
<p>
Aristobulus, a Jew who lived around 300 B.C., said that the version of the "Law" was translated into Greek during the reign of Ptolemy Philadelphus and was used by Demetrius Phalereus. While most consider the term "Law" to apply only to the Pentateuch, others include all of the sacred writings. 
</p><p>
It is somewhat certain that the Septuagint began to be translated prior to 285 B.C. However the production of the Septuagint is shrouded in myth. 
</p><p>
The story goes that a writer named Aristeas said that when Ptolemy Philadelphus was busy creating his extensive library in Alexandria, he was advised by Demetrius to obtain a translation of the sacred books of the Jews. In response, the king purchased more than 100,000 Jewish captives. He sent a request to Eleazar the high-priest for 72 translators (six from each tribe). Aristeas was one of the 72. Demetrius transported the 72 to an island where they completed the translation in 72 days. Others embellished the story saying that each translator was sequestered into separate cells where by divine inspiration they emerged within the time limit with identical versions. The number 72 gives us the Septuagint's abbreviation of LXX. 
</p><p>
At any rate, the truth of its translation is not clear. However, it does bear evidence of words and expressions which indicate that it was written in Egypt rather than in Palestine. 
</p><p>
In many places in the New Testament, the writers quote the Septuagint leading some to suppose that the Septuagint has equal authority. However there are instances where the New Testament writers avoid the Septuagint and supply their own translation of the Hebrew text which contradicted the Septuagint. 
</p><p>
A study of some New Testament passages reveals that they are formed on words and phrases found in the Septuagint. Thus for the expositor of the New Testament, the Septuagint is an important work. While the Septuagint may be defective in its inadequate translation, its departure from the sense of the Hebrew, its doctrinal deficiencies, etc., it is still a valuable text. 
</p><p>
Around A.D. 126 Aquila, a Greek converted to Judaism, made a translation of the Hebrew Old Testament in which each Hebrew word was translated into its Greek equivalent without regard to the flow or grammar of the text. His purpose, apparently, was to counter Christians who were citing passages from the Septuagint to refer to Jesus Christ. 
</p><p>
Also in the second century Symmachus, an Ebionite, created another Greek translation of the Hebrew. His translation had better Greek grammar, probably in opposition to Aquila's version. 
</p><p>
About the same time Theodotion, also an Ebionite, created his version leaning heavily on the Septuagint. 
</p><p>
Origen, c185-254, produced his Hexapla and Tetrapla. The Hexapla had six columns where in the first was the Hebrew text, in the second column was the Hebrew text expressed in Greek characters. In the third was the version of Aquila. In the fourth was the version of Symmachus; in the fifth was the Septuagint; and in the sixth was that of Theodotion. The Tetrapla was the same except it didn't have the first two columns, just the last four of the Hexapla. To the Hexapla were added two other columns of anonymous Greek versions. Origen's intention was to create a restored Septuagint. Where the Greek text added to the Hebrew, he marked it with an obelus (+); but if the Greek omitted something, then it was marked with an asterisk (*). Later those who copied the material misunderstood the meaning of the annotations. 
</p><p>
In the beginning of the fourth century, two others (Lucian and Hesychius) each attempted to revise the Septuagint. 
</p><p>
In the work which follows this introduction, you will note that some books have two different versions: Joshua, Judges, and Daniel. Similarly in the Apocrypha there are two different versions of Tobit, Susanna, and Bel and the Dragon. An interesting exercise would be to compare these in parallel columns as Origen did. 
</p><p>
You will notice that Ezra and Nehemiah are combined in II Esdras. Ezra is in the first ten chapters while Nehemiah begins in chapter eleven. I Esdras is considered an Apocryphal book. 
</p><p>
Throughout the Septuagint, you will find missing verses. In others, like Esther, whole sections have been added primarily to offset the fact that the word "God" is missing in the Hebrew. The Septuagint adds almost 50 instance of Κύριος or Θεός. 
</p><p>
The numbering of the Psalms changes as well. Psalm 9 contains both the 9th and 10th Psalm. Thus the Septuagint Psalm 10 is equivalent to the Hebrew Psalm 11. This misnumbering continues to Psalm 146 so that the Hebrew Psalm number is inserted in parentheses. As well, a final Psalm is added making 151 Psalms. 
</p><p>
The order of the Proverbs in the LXX intermingles verses and chapters. I have taken the liberty of rearranging the order so that it follows the pattern of the Hebrew text. Some passages seem out of order. For instance at the end of Jer. 23 are two verses 7 & 8 following verse 40. In fact, the chapters of Jeremiah are greatly rearranged with whole sections missing. 
</p>
<h4>The New Testament</h4>
<p>
The Apostle Paul wrote that God sent forth His Son at the πλήρωμα τοῦ χρόνου (fullness of time) (Gal. 4:4). There were many factors which contributed to making this time ideal for the coming of the Son and the spreading of the gospel.</p>
<ol>
<li>There were Roman roads throughout the Roman Empire which allowed for quicker transportation for people and goods</li>
<li>There were many merchant ships which moved both goods and people around the Mediterranean Sea.</li>
<li>There was a common ruling body.</li>
<li>But, most importantly, there was a common language: Greek.</li>
</ol>
<p>
You might think that almost any language of the day would have been suitable for communicating the Gospel, but such was not the case.
<ol>
<li>It is true that Aramaic was spoken by Jesus and His disciples, but it was too local. A religion that was destined by God to reach the world needed to be communicated in a world-wide language.</li>
<li>Latin, at this time, was spoken only by a few in what is now Italy.</li>
<li>Classical Greek would not be suitable because it was the language of the upper-class in wealth, culture, and refinement. Christianity had a message of hope to the uneducated, the poor, and the oppressed. Classical Greek could never reach the general populace. God did not ignore the upper-class, because even they could understand the common Greek.</li>
</ol>
</p><p>
The Greek language was ideal because of its inflection, exact vocabulary, precision of tenses, and its clarity.
<ul>
<li>Take the Hebrew language, for instance, as a contrast with Greek. When you read Psalm 119, you quickly discover that the psalmist must have written this psalm with a Hebrew thesaurus on his lap. Look at the many different words he uses to refer to Scripture. There really does not seem to be much distinction between these words. They are used interchangeably.</li>
<li>Even in English we use one word which has two different meanings. Do you remember the child's joke: "Who has more power than Superman?" The answer: "A policeman: he can stop a whole line of cars with one hand." The word "power" may mean strength or authority.</li>
<li>The Greeks, however, distinguished power as strength from power as authority by using two different words. They were never used interchangeably. Most often, different words were used to distinguish similar ideas. There is a danger, however, in translating from Greek to English. Some expositors make a much bigger difference between these distinctive words than is justifiable.</li>
<li>Greek was useful for explaining, categorizing and distinguishing concepts</li>
<li>While Hebrew was good for biographical data, Greek excelled in presenting propositional facts</li>
<li>Greek was more technically precise than Hebrew</li>
</ul>
</p><p>
Prior to the writing of the New Testament, Greece was not a unified country. There were many autonomous city-states separated by rugged terrain. In order to maintain their individuality and their property, they fought with each other. Each area had its own dialect and orthography (way of forming the letters). The prominent dialect, Attic, became the language of culture and philosophy. But there were other dialects just as popular: the Aeolic, the Boeotian, the Doric, and the Ionic. 
</p><p>
Two factors brought the Κοινη [koy-NAY] Greek language into prominence. First, Philip of Macedon unified the Greek city states around 350 B.C. As a result these states were no longer isolated. Distinctives of dialect began to disappear. Second, in 334 B.C., Alexander the Great (356-323 B.C.) began a rapid conquering of the world. Greek culture circled the Mediterranean world and stretched into Asia Minor and even into Persia. When Alexander assembled an army from various parts of Greece and Macedonia, the recruits had many differences in dialect and orthography; but these were merged into a popularized language and became the common language spoken by all. This common language not only influenced the Greek army and Greek colonies, but it also affected the Jews of the Diaspora [the scattering of the Jews after the Babylonian captivity]. Some of them translated the Old Testament into Κοινη (common) Greek. We refer to this translation as the Septuagint (often abbreviated as LXX). The corresponding influence of the Septuagint upon the New Testament is significant. The Κοινη language was popular from about 300 B.C. to 330 A.D. or possibly to 500 A.D. 
</p><p>
The Greek language can be divided into five periods of development and change. Although there is no definite day when the language changed, the changes were gradual and dependent upon various cultural changes brought about by trade and war.
<ul><li>Homeric 1000 BC to 500 BC
</li><li>Attic 500 BC to 300 BC
</li><li>Koine 300 BC to 500 AD
</li><li>Byzantine 500 AD to 1400 AD
</li><li>Modern 1400 AD to present
</li></ul>
</p><p>
Until 1824-93, many thought that Koine was a "Holy Ghost" language which was invented by God for the transmission of scriptural revelation. They thought that no one actually spoke it as a common language of the day. Since that time, letters have been found indicating that Koine was the common language of the time. Koine was not only the spoken language, but it also had a rich literature. 
</p><p>
Greek was a universal language
<ul><li>While the Old Testament was given to one nation in its own language (Hebrew), God's purpose was to give the New Testament revelation in a language understood by most of the known world. Jesus said, "The Christ will suffer and rise from the dead on the third day, and repentance and forgiveness of sins will be preached in His name to all nations" (Luke 24:46-47).
</li><li>Koine was the trade language of the Mediterranean. It was spoken by Jews, Romans, Greeks, and others. See Acts 2:7-11. Though they heard a miracle, they undoubtedly had talked to each other in the common language: Koine Greek.
</li><li>Latin was not yet popular
</li><li>Alexander the Great had conquered the known world (331 BC) and forced the Greek language and culture upon the people he subjected. He established Greek cities with Greek cultures and a Greek language
</li><li>Rome simply took over (about 63 BC) from the Greeks, but without the same kind of cultural and linguistic aggression, so that the people retained the Greek language rather than switching to Latin
</li><li>On the one hand Greece had united the peoples of Asia, Europe, and Africa with a universal language and culture; on the other hand, Rome had made a universal government and accessible roads.
</li></ul>
</p><p>
The text is in public domain; but the arragement is mine. An interactive site of the LXX, NT, Apocrypha, and some Early Church Writings is available at http://www.motorera.com/greek/greek.html. This site is interesting in that by clicking on any given word you will be taken to a lexicon of that word giving its meaning as well as parsing information. Hitting the "back" button takes you back to the text. In this way you can read along without having to spend time flipping through the pages of a paper lexicon. 
</p>


