A Generous Orthodoxy

[Rick Henry]

kirk yacoub Wrote:. . . is it not much simpler to return to the Gospel and read the words of our Lord and God Jesus Christ?

Dear Kirk,

Assuming you are aware of the issues surrounding your suggestion above, I would say yes, a thousand times yes[!] this sounds very good to me. But, possibly, as you know there are those who would burn both of us at the stake for suggesting such a thing (if the jail time were not so lengthy).

And, when you follow this up with:

Quote:Having absorbed these words, not so much into our minds as into our hearts, we can then check not only Patristic statements, but also whatever is taught regarding these statements.

I think again, how well put.

But, as we consider what you are suggesting here, especially as it relates to this discussion as a whole, we see even upon a superficial glance that the tide is against what is being proposed. Beginning with the production of the LXX, Septuagint and through today things are not approached this way as a rule.

For example, I have just begun studying what I will refer to as Orthodox Bibliology. Normally, when one studies Bibliology there is a focus on transmission and translation of the manuscripts and the versions that are derived from these, among other things. But, accuracy and translations faithful to the text are what is striven for here, and held up as the standard. And, I am probably not telling you anything that you don't already know here; but, I am working towards a point in all of this.

And, this point is that it appears the new Orthodox Study Bible of the Old Testament that is about ready for sale has an interesting history behind it. In fact as it relates to the field of Biblology, I am not sure where exactly this one fits, hence my reference to "Orthodox" Bibliology. What I am getting at here is this OSB is not a translation of any Hebrew Texts or even the LXX itself; but, this is a case where the New King James Bible has been taken and adapted to suit "Orthodox" beliefs. I find it interesting that the project manager and chief editor seems to have no language training. But, possibly this is explained in the following post from another site about the methodology being employed here:

Quote:The OSB project is using this foundation [New King James Bible] to bring forth a reverent, elegant, but readable text in English that conforms to the Orthodox textual tradition and interpretive norms.

I wonder if you caught the last part there . . . just after "Orthodox textual tradition" we see that this Bible is being conformed to Orthodox "interpretive norms."

And, this speaks to a mindset here, doesn't it Kirk?

But, let's say that even if this project would have begun with the LXX (let alone the Hebrew Scriptures), I wonder if things would have been any different in the end? Because, I am finding that the method used to prepare the OSB in terms of 'interpretive norms,' is the same as was employed by the ones who prepared the LXX. And, to help here I will quote another from another site, a priest/monk to make this point:

Quote:The LXX did represent changes from the Hebrew but of a kind which were seen as conveying the tradition of the Church in the context in which it found itself.

Yes, we did produce a Greek version of the Hebrew Scriptures, and yes, we did change the meaning of the words used in the text (possibly an early manifestation of the 'humpty dumpty clause'/HDC?), but it's okay because this was done to convey the tradition of the Church in the context in which it was a that time.

So, even though I fully agree with you when you say, wouldn't it just be much simpler to return to the Gospel and read the words of our Lord and God Jesus Christ? . . . I find myself in the minority here with this sentiment. And, it is not in reality a simple thing but a very complex thing in my neck of the woods, and possibly yours too?

What you have proposed stands in complete opposition to such things as what I have come to recognize as being an Orthodox hermeneutic as well as an Orthodox bibliology.

And, I am not familiar with your background; but, I would go so far as to say that the majority view, to be found within some parts of Eastern Orthodoxy, would support the position that what you have suggested is anti-Orthodox.

So on one hand, I agree with you it would be much simpler, but on the other hand this is a complex issue.

In Christ,
Rick