Digital Logos Edition
This volume includes a full introduction, which deals with the development of the text and the literary development from the earliest dictated scrolls to its final form.
In the Logos edition, this volume is enhanced by amazing functionality. Important terms link to dictionaries, encyclopedias, and a wealth of other resources in your digital library. Perform powerful searches to find exactly what you’re looking for. Take the discussion with you using tablet and mobile apps. With Logos Bible Software, the most efficient and comprehensive research tools are in one place, so you get the most out of your study.
Interested in more Hermeneia commentaries? Explore the series and watch the video here.
“the Proto-Masoretic text thus became the standard one in Palestine.” (Page 6)
“The question becomes: In the main is G a shortened form of M, or is M an expanded form, of G?” (Page 3)
“The disparity between M and G in Jer is well known: Jer is comparable to the Books of Samuel in the contrasting texts of M and G. But whereas in Samuel M is often shorter and defective in comparison with G, in Jer M is longer: Friedrich Giesebrecht estimated that about twenty-seven hundred words of M are lacking in G, while G contains about one hundred words lacking in M;7 the result is that G is about one-eighth shorter than M. The question of the relation between G and M has been discussed for a century and a half,8 but until the recovery of the Qumran material it was possible to slight the importance of G: one could assume that its omissions had arisen secondarily within the Greek tradition, whether by design or accidentally.” (Pages 2–3)
“Greek Version (the Septuagint, hereinafter G) differs markedly from the traditional Hebrew text (the Masoretic text, hereinafter M): the oracles against foreign nations (chaps. 46–51) as a group are to be found in G after 25:13*, and there in an altogether different sequence from that in M. And more generally in the prose passages of the book the text of G often does not exhibit phrases and sequences present in M most of these omissions are short, but a few are extensive—the longest being 33:14–26*.” (Page 1)
“The presence at Qumran of a Hebrew text representing the text tradition of G (4QJerb) dating from the Hasmonean period alongside a Proto-Masoretic text from the beginning of the second century b.c.e. (4QJera) immediately raises the question of the origin of these two text types.” (Page 6)