Customer Reviews

A New English Translation of the Septuagint

5 star:		(10)
4 star:		(6)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(3)
1 star:		(1)

 

 

I had been eagerly awaiting my pre-ordered copy of "A New English Translation of the Septuagint" (NETS) because I knew that eminent LXX experts had been hard at work to give us a long overdue scholarly translation that would supersede the older, widely-familiar translation of Sir Lancelot C. L. Brenton. Now that I have read through parts of NETS, I have mixed reactions to it: NETS is not everything that I had hoped for, but it is nevertheless a satisfactory translation. In addition, there are brief-but-helpful introductions to each individual book of the LXX in which the history, background, Greek text used, and translation techniques/difficulties of the particular book are addressed. A bonus is that the translations of the Book of Daniel, as well as the apocryphal additions of "Susanna" and "Bel and the Dragon", contain both the Old Greek version and the later translation by Theodotion in parallel columns; other books which also have two distinctly different Greek texts, such as Judges and Esther, receive the same treatment.

Since I was under the impression that this would be a completely new translation, I was surprised to find out that the translators had used the New Revised Standard Version (NRSV) as the base text for NETS. Editors Albert Pietersma and Benjamin G. Wright use a considerable percentage of their foreword to the reader to explain the rationale for this decision, and they admit that it "perhaps needs some justification." They believe that using the NRSV as a base text was "the more practical and economical" approach and assert that NETS is "not intended to be the-NRSV-once-over-lightly but rather a genuine representation of the Greek." The purpose behind this decision was so that the user of NETS "should be able to utilize it to the greatest degree achievable (within set parameters) in a comparative study of the Hebrew and Greek texts, albeit in English translation." Given that this was the goal, I can grudgingly concede the translators' use of the NRSV as a base text rather than translating without any dependence on an existing English version.

While the goal of being able to study the Hebrew and Greek texts of the O.T., "albeit in English," is a good one, I am disappointed that the translation will not be quite as useful to me in my own reading of Alfred Rahlfs' edition of the Septuagint. The reason for this is that the translators used the Goettingen Septuagint editions for those books in the LXX for which a Goettingen editon is available (they did use Rahlfs' edition for the remaining books). It is my understanding that the books of the Goettingen Septuagint are the foremost critical editions available today; however, they are not widely available (and, therefore, not likely to be affordable for the average lay reader/scholar who could track down copies of the books). I have no idea how different the Goettingen LXX editions are from Rahlfs' edition, so I suppose I'll find out as I encounter the differences in NETS. Again, I grudgingly accept this decision on the part of the editors - and I say grudgingly only because it hinders my intended use for the translation - due to their rightful desire to use the best available texts.

As far as the intended audience, the foreword states that NETS is intended for "a biblically well-educated audience" which "has a more than passing interest in traditions of biblical literature other than their own." The translation approach makes this English version of the LXX "more a translation of formal correspondence than one of dynamic equivalence"; this means that NETS is intended neither for liturgical use in churches, nor as an easily-accessible version for everyday reading.

Given the approach of `formal correspondence', a reader should expect some rather inelegant translations in portions of text. However, I got no further than Genesis 1:2 before I encountered an example of a passage that made me question certain translation choices. Robert J. V. Hiebert, the translator of Genesis, renders 1:2 thusly: "Yet the earth was invisible and unformed, and darkness was over the abyss, and a divine wind was being carried along over the water." The "divine wind" conjured up the image of Japanese kamikaze (which means `divine wind') planes diving into American battleships. However, beyond the unfortunate word association of the expression, I also don't believe that "divine wind" is the best translation for the Greek "pneuma theou" or the Hebrew "ruah elohim" (and, yes, the editors do state that one must also consider the Hebrew text that underlies the LXX when translating certain words or expressions). While both "pneuma" and "ruah" can mean `wind', `spirit', or `breath', I can't recall ever seeing "theou" or "elohim" translated as the adjective "divine" (the NRSV, the base text for NETS, translates this as "a wind from God"). In addition to the fact that I'm not certain that "divine" is a viable translation, a "divine wind...being carried" doesn't make the best sense contextually either; thus, "being carried" is probably not the best translation choice for the Greek word "epiphero". Since a wind usually `carries' rather than "being carried", I would submit either "the spirit of God was rushing upon the water" or "the breath of God was rushing upon the water".

The abovementioned items are just a few things to take into consideration if you are trying to decide whether or not to purchase this translation. All in all, while NETS is not precisely what I had been expecting, its shortcomings - which some readers might not consider to be such - are not so serious as to make it a "pestiferous" translation (see Pietersma's translation of Psalm 1:1 for another example of an inelegantly translated passage in which, this time, the word "pestiferous" is used). I look forward to the possibilty of a parallel Greek-NETS edition or, better yet, a parallel Greek-NETS-NRSV edition; either such volume would make NETS far more useful.

Addendum: One day after writing this review, I received a catalogue that contained "A Comparative Psalter" edited by John R. Kohlenberger III. It was published in 2006 and is also available here on Amazon. This Psalter contains, in parallel columns, the Hebrew Masoretic Text and the English Revised Standard Version (not sure why he went with the old RSV rather than the NRSV - copyright royalties perhaps?) on one page and the Greek Septuagint Text alongside the NETS on the facing page. It gives me hope that such a comparative volume for the entire Old Testament will be printed at some point in the not-too-distant future (the fact that the Hebrew MT would be included in such an edition is fantastic - I had thought about that when I made my suggestions at the end of my review, but then I figured it might be asking for a bit too much. I'm glad to know that's not the case).

I was looking forward to this translation after reading Brenton's excellent version.
Plusses so far:
Format - excellent. Value for money, couldn't be better. Notes and explanations, generous and very useful. The one book I have read in its entirety so far is Esther - excellent, handles the lengthy parentheses very well, couldn't put it down. I have only dipped into some of the others.
Disappointments:
Genesis: "divine wind" instead of "Spirit of God" - somewhat puzzling, bearing in mind the context (I speak as a professional translator). (Some of the English in the NETS needs tidying up - with footnotes if there is a problem.)
Psalms: From the preface "To the reader of Psalms": "At not a few places, Ralfs enclosed within square brackets items of text, which, although they could not in his judgement justifiably be regarded as original nevertheless have widespread support in the textual traditions. Since in all these cases I agree with Ralfs' conclusion, I have excluded these items from NETS without comment." - OUCH! Example: Psalm 39(40) Verse 7(6) "Sacrifice and offering you did not want, but a body you have prepared for me" has been replaced by "Sacrifice and offering you did not want, but ears you have fashioned for me" from the MT I guess but without comment. So, the translator is inferring that the writer of Hebrews in the NT who quotes this verse from the LXX (as most other NT writers quote from the LXX) is also wrong? I would expect an accademic version to contain the omitted text to enable the reader to judge for himself - as Ralfs did for the Greek text.
Worth getting? certainly, but IMHO it could be improved with some revision.

The NETS is the single best translation of the Septuagint on the market (at least at the moment). The translation follows an ultra-literal method of translation they call "interlinear". The reason for this is that the LXX follows the same pattern and is very jarring. So, where the Hebrew and LXX agree, they translate the Hebrew text and translate it as literally as possible following the LXX at the same time. Where it disagrees, they follow the LXX.

It has as a "boiler-plate" the NRSV, but it eschews many NRSV translation principles like gender-inclusive language. All gender-inclusive language except when the LXX's language is itself gender-inclusive (and this happens). The method of translation further removes it from its English parent. In the end, the only way you can know that it started as an NRSV would be to read the introduction.

It really only has a few drawbacks. First, because the Bible is written for scholarly study, it is not useful for liturgical use or for private devotional use. Its language would also be too hard for the average reader because of its audience. This, however, is its stated goal. It may be a draw-back, but that's a side-effect of what it set out to do.

I do not like the way they translated "pnevma theou" as "divine wind" in Genesis. It's justifiable to a point (it means "breath" and "wind" as much as it does "spirit), but everywhere else I checked they translated translated "pnevma" as "spirit". It should be consistent. The reason for this is plainly obvious: it was produced by an inter-religious committee of Christians and Jews. Since Jews are not Trinitarians, and that would be a valid understanding of the Hebrew and to a degree of the Greek, they would naturally not want anything like this. Christians, almost from the beginning, have made the connection between "Spirit of God" in Genesis and "Holy Spirit". The connection is further exasperated in English, because "spirit" for us does not have the same range of meaning as it does in Greek or Hebrew. So, the only fault I can give them is that it is an inconsistent translation, not that it's an invalid one.

The prefaces also almost invariably favor the theory that the LXX is a translation with liberties over that it has a different parent text. Both are truly present, but we generally cannot tell when the LXX reading cannot be derived from repointing or re-dividing the Hebrew words (at that time, they had not yet pointed the text or put spaces in it, and so there were more ways to interpret the consonants than in its current form). Again, however, they do not say anything that is invalid regarding the relation of the LXX and its parent text. I simply divide the text differently than they do and so do not always like the introductions' emphasis.

Going back to its strengths, its production standards were exceptional. The binding is excellent, the font is excellent, and it has generous margins. It even does this by being as cheap as the "cheap" Bibles. Short of going back to rag paper, this is about as good as I would normally expect.

Overall, if you have good reading skills, I would reccomend this translation hands-down over any other English translation.

Though the NETS Bible calls itself a new translation of the Septuagint it is really a publication designed to draw the Septuagint closer to the Hebrew text. The NETS translators consider the Septuagint subservient to the Hebrew (Masoretic Text) while not taking into consideration that the Septuagint and Masoretic texts are from two separate and distinct sets of MSS. The idea that the Septuagint is an inferior text has always plagued translators when in fact this is not the case. The publication of the DSS proved the existance of two separate and distinct MSS of the Hebrew scriptures though the proof was withheld until 1991 when outside pressure forced their release. All this monkey business in churchdom..............

5 stars for the book itself, but 2 stars for the Kindle edition because the it is seriously handicapped as a usable e-book.

Specifically, the Kindle edition has the same problem as the Kindle NRSV (2vol) Harper Catholic Bible e-book: virtually non-existent navigation makes the Kindle edition useless for anything but continuous reading by book, or for reading the translation rationale and individual translators' prefaces.

Navigation in the Kindle edition consists solely of a TOC that gets you to the start of an individual book's lengthy translator's notes. Paging through these to the start of the actual book text is agonizingly slow on Kindle even at the smallest type size, because the Greek and Hebrew words in the prefaces are graphic images.

Paging to where you want to be in a book is faster on "KindleForPC", but still a royal pain, and a merely marginal "work-around". Adding one's own bookmarks at the head of books (let alone chapters) is not a practical workaround either on a book of this length.

What on earth ails e-book publishers, even from major presses (Harper, Oxford), and amazon.com for not paying attention to what they're selling, that they can't seem to "get it" about the requirement of adequate navigation aids in reference works or works with many footnotes, appendices, etc. ??!!

As for the complaints in other reviews about the translators' prefaces ("boring"), or the use of the NSRV as a base for the translation, the complainers should carefully read the introduction to the whole work (with brain engaged), and the individual prefaces to learn what this NETS is all about in the first place (and what the LXX itself is and isn't). I found an exegetically illuminating note in the second preface I read!

Incidentally, the hardback edition of the NETS Psalms is a wonderful resource. The text is printed in 4 columns: Hebrew, NSRV English, NETS English, and LXX Greek.

A New English Translation of the Septuagint is a very welcomed new Translation of the ancient and revered Septuagint (LXX) into the English Language. As a Greek Orthodox Christian my Old Testament is the Septuagint and as an English-Speaking Christian I finally have "My" Old Testament in English. I assume, from reading the translators website, that the electronic postings of this translation are the same as they are going to be in the Hardcover book, and if that is the case, the translation is truly wonderful. Having said this it must also be said that the English and sentence structure used is NOT SUITABLE for Liturgy. This is a reference and study source only, and if one is looking for a litugically acceptable English translation of the Septuagint then get the FULL Orthodox Study Bible that is coming out next year (2008) in March. However, I would still recommend any Orthodox (and Non-Orthodox) Christian to buy the NETS Translation and to read it, study it and cherish it and to add NETS to Brenton's and Charles Thompson's English translations of the Septuagint, although NETS is Much, MUCH Better! I already Pre-Ordered my copy get yours right away!!! To the Translators and Editors of NETS, especially Prof. Albert Pietersma and Benjamin Wright all I can say to them and their translation is AXIOS!

Translations into English of the full Old Testament (including, of course, its deuterocanonical writings) in Greek, long known as the Septuagint (LXX), have been rather few in number over the years. Thus, it is all the more suprising that two projects to translate the LXX have appeared in publication so rapidly one on the heels of the other. They are the New English Translation of the Septuagint (N.E.T.S.), on the one hand; on the other, there is the O.T. portion of the "Orthodox Study Bible" (O.S.B.), which its publisher, T. Nelson, for its part, issued only one year later (2008) and which encompasses both the Old Testament (O.T.) and the New Testament (N.T.). The O.T. of the O.S.B. denominates that translation's trademarked name as the "St. Athanasius Academy Septuagint" (S.A.A.S.). For most readers, these two new translations probably will have priority of interest over older translations of the LXX that have appeared in the 19th and 20th centuries, including that of Sir Lancelot Charles Lee Brenton (still available in reprint), which still has its advocates to a respectable degree (and rightly so), more of them among Anglican and Protestant scholars, however, than among the Eastern Orthodox.

The O.S.B. incorporates that own freshly completed new translation of its own of the Greek Septuagint O.T. (known, as already mentioned, as the "St. Athanasius Academy Septuagint" English Version, the S.A.A.S., for short), of which the translation project director is the estimable Jack Norman Sparks (who also is the principal editor of the O.S.B. as a whole), which can assure the Eastern Orthodox layman that the O.S.B. would opt for Eastern Orthodox preferences, regarding resort to preferred manuscript sources and concerning certain other matters as well. The full title of the N.E.T.S. version as the title page presents it may hint at some of these possibilities for divergence in exercise of scholarly judgment and preferences; in full, the publication's descriptive title is "A New English Translation of the Septuagint and the Other Greek Translations Traditionally Included under That Title" (N.E.T.S); however, the shorter form of the title constitutes the trademark's official wording. The scholarship embodied in the O.S.B. is entirely (or very largely) Eastern Orthodox, including that of many Orthodox converts from evangelical Protestantism; this is an asset, not a weakness, for the O.S.B.'s Orthodox men of learning circumspectly avoid what at times are some reckless turns of phrase that occasionally mar renderings of verses, sometimes disturbingly so, here and there in the N.E.T.S. By contrast with the O.S.B., two resolutely Protestant scholars, Allen Pietersma and Benjamin G. Wright (but, compromising reliability, with the cooperation, along the way in their project, of some Jewish pedants among the other scholars who assisted them), edited the N.E.T.S. for Oxford University Press' 2007 publication (which bears the ISBN 978-0-19-528975-6). As the O.S.B. took the O.T. of the New King James Version (N.K.J.V.) as the literary point of departure, in editing and recasting the wording the N.K.J.V.'s O.T. text to comply with the LXX Greek O.T., the N.E.T.S. chose to rework the New Revised Standard Version (N.R.S.V.) of the O.T. to conform it to the Greek LXX O.T.

The results of the editors' work for the N.E.T.S. English translation of the Greek LXX O.T. are remarkably fine. The N.E.T.S. translation is crisply clear (apart from occasional passages that are inhabitually awkward-sounding in an otherwise elegantly worded rendition) and it is freer of the slight ambiguities here and there that one finds in even the S.A.A.S. English rendition of the LXX O.T., except when the N.E.T.S. addles things a bit in its own way! (It is worth using these two English translations in conjunction with each other!) The traces of "feminist-speak" (or "inclusive language") and of other flaws in the N.R.S.V.'s at times too trendy original translation seem, from what this reader can tell in having used the N.E.T.S. fairly intensively along with the O.S.B.'s S.A.A.S., to have disappeared entirely, so meticulously thorough has been the work of Pietersma and Wright in reworking and conforming the N.R.S.V.'s O.T. to the Greek LXX.

From this layman's point of view, the only real obstacle to ease in using the N.E.T.S. edition of the O.T. for daily reading is the N.E.T.S.' pedantic use of exactly transliterated forms of personal and place names, which differ (sometimes markedly) from the better-known forms of name in other English Bibles, which the O.S.B., for its part, wisely chose to retain as being more reader-friendly. Also, of course, having an O.T. in a volume, i.e. here the N.E.T.S., separate from the rest of the Bible (the N.T.) makes using the O.S.B. more convenient for daily use, in order for a reader to access, in a single volume, both the N.T. as well as the O.T.; this makes the O.S.B. (added to the O.S.B.'s avoidance of the sort of highly debatable renderings which occur at times in the N.E.T.S. that negatively and needlessly can affect doctrine) to be the principal choice for a practical edition of the Bible, in full (and, at that, according entirely to Greek texts), for constant use.

All hail to the successful completion of both of these translations and publishing projects, the "Orthodox Study Bible" and the N.E.T.S. English translation of the Greek Septuagint Old Testament! The O.S.B., for its part, makes the complete Greek Bible translated into English available for today's Anglophone readers, especially for the Orthodox faithful among them, as well as for other Christians, and the N.E.T.S., for its share of glory, provides, most of the time and despite some serious flaws, what is perhaps the most delightfully clear yet graciously worded English translation of the LXX Greek O.T. that has appeared to date!

The last popularly published, English translation of the ancient Greek translation of the Hebrew Bible, commonly called the Septuagint, was in 1851. And now, after over 150 years, a nice English translation has been published again...long over due. This NEW ENGLISH TRANSLATION OF THE SEPTUAGINT is the final product of extensive academic study by members of the INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATION OF SEPTUAGINT AND COGNATE STUDIES and is far more impressive than Brenton's 1851 translation.
It is a valuable addition to the library of anyone who is interested in the study of not only the Hebrew Tanach [Old Testament] but also the New Testament, since the Septuagint was a theological and linguistic "bridge" between the Hebrew Tanach and Greek New Testament, as well as the most ancient "commentary" that we have of the Hebrew Tanach.

Larry N. Baker, prof. of NT Greek,
Mid-America Christian University, Oklahoma City

This is an excellent translation of the Septuagint, the first translation of the Hebrew Bible, rendered into Greek.

There are essentially two approaches to understanding the Septuagint. The first, the general consensus among academics today, is that there was an original Torah that no longer exists. Academics call this lost Torah the "Ur-Torah," or original Torah. According to these academics, three different strands of Judaism copied the Ur-Torah before it was lost, making changes to its wording for various reasons, such as to use it to prove their conception of Judaism, or to add clarity, or because of simple errors or misunderstandings. According to this approach, the Septuagint is one version of the original lost Torah, the Samaritan Bible is a second, and the current Hebrew text, called the Masoretic Text, is the third.

The third version is named the Masoretic Text because early scholars, called Masorites (from the word masorah, meaning traditional), worked on the text to ensure that it was what they considered the correct original divine text from the past. The Masorites lived and worked during the first millennium of the Common Era. Different Masoretic versions, with very slight variations, existed as late as the twelfth century. The great Jewish philosopher and codifier Moses Maimonides (1138-1204) examined them and decided which was correct, and his decision was generally accepted. There are still very minor differences in texts today.

The second view, the view of many traditional believers, is that the Masoretic Text is the original Torah, although it contains some errors; the Septuagint and Samaritan Bible inserted changes into this original text intentionally to meet the needs of the groups who were using the two altered versions. They are thus changes to the Masoretic Text, not changes to an Ur-Torah.

This book is important whichever view one accepts because of the antiquity of the Septuagint.

Translations into English of the full Old Testament (including, of course, its deuterocanonical writings) in Greek, long known as the Septuagint (LXX), have been rather few in number over the years. Thus, it is all the more suprising that two projects to translate the LXX have appeared in publication so rapidly one on the heels of the other. They are the New English Translation of the Septuagint (N.E.T.S.), on the one hand; on the other, there is the O.T. portion of the "Orthodox Study Bible" (O.S.B.), which its publisher, T. Nelson, for its part, issued only one year later (2008) and which encompasses both the Old Testament (O.T.) and the New Testament (N.T.). The O.T. of the O.S.B. denominates that translation's trademarked name as the "St. Athanasius Academy Septuagint" (S.A.A.S.). For most readers, these two new translations probably will have priority of interest over older translations of the LXX that have appeared in the 19th and 20th centuries, including that of Sir Lancelot Charles Lee Brenton (still available in reprint), which still has its advocates to a respectable degree (and rightly so), more of them among Anglican and Protestant scholars, however, than among the Eastern Orthodox.

The O.S.B. incorporates that own freshly completed new translation of its own of the Greek Septuagint O.T. (known, as already mentioned, as the "St. Athanasius Academy Septuagint" English Version, the S.A.A.S., for short), of which the translation project director is the estimable Jack Norman Sparks (who also is the principal editor of the O.S.B. as a whole), which can assure the Eastern Orthodox layman that the O.S.B. would opt for Eastern Orthodox preferences, regarding resort to preferred manuscript sources and concerning certain other matters as well. The full title of the N.E.T.S. version as the title page presents it may hint at some of these possibilities for divergence in exercise of scholarly judgment and preferences; in full, the publication's descriptive title is "A New English Translation of the Septuagint and the Other Greek Translations Traditionally Included under That Title" (N.E.T.S); however, the shorter form of the title constitutes the trademark's official wording. The scholarship embodied in the O.S.B. is entirely (or very largely) Eastern Orthodox, including that of many Orthodox converts from evangelical Protestantism; this is an asset, not a weakness, for the O.S.B.'s Orthodox men of learning circumspectly avoid what at times are some reckless turns of phrase that occasionally mar renderings of verses, sometimes disturbingly so, here and there in the N.E.T.S. By contrast with the O.S.B., two resolutely Protestant scholars, Allen Pietersma and Benjamin G. Wright (but, compromising reliability, with the cooperation, along the way in their project, of some Jewish pedants among the other scholars who assisted them), edited the N.E.T.S. for Oxford University Press' 2007 publication (which bears the ISBN 978-0-19-528975-6). As the O.S.B. took the O.T. of the New King James Version (N.K.J.V.) as the literary point of departure, in editing and recasting the wording the N.K.J.V.'s O.T. text to comply with the LXX Greek O.T., the N.E.T.S. chose to rework the New Revised Standard Version (N.R.S.V.) of the O.T. to conform it to the Greek LXX O.T.

The results of the editors' work for the N.E.T.S. English translation of the Greek LXX O.T. are remarkably fine. The N.E.T.S. translation is crisply clear (apart from occasional passages that are inhabitually awkward-sounding in an otherwise elegantly worded rendition) and it is freer of the slight ambiguities here and there that one finds in even the S.A.A.S. English rendition of the LXX O.T., except when the N.E.T.S. addles things a bit in its own way! (It is worth using these two English translations in conjunction with each other!) The traces of "feminist-speak" (or "inclusive language") and of other flaws in the N.R.S.V.'s at times too trendy original translation seem, from what this reader can tell in having used the N.E.T.S. fairly intensively along with the O.S.B.'s S.A.A.S., to have disappeared entirely, so meticulously thorough has been the work of Pietersma and Wright in reworking and conforming the N.R.S.V.'s O.T. to the Greek LXX.

From this layman's point of view, the only real obstacle to ease in using the N.E.T.S. edition of the O.T. for daily reading is the N.E.T.S.' pedantic use of exactly transliterated forms of personal and place names, which differ (sometimes markedly) from the better-known forms of name in other English Bibles, which the O.S.B., for its part, wisely chose to retain as being more reader-friendly. Also, of course, having an O.T. in a volume, i.e. here the N.E.T.S., separate from the rest of the Bible (the N.T.) makes using the O.S.B. more convenient for daily use, in order for a reader to access, in a single volume, both the N.T. as well as the O.T.; this makes the O.S.B. (added to the O.S.B.'s avoidance of the sort of excessively debatable renderings which occur at times in the N.E.T.S. that negatively and needlessly can affect doctrine) to be the principal choice for a practical edition of the Bible, in full (and, at that, according entirely to Greek texts), for constant use.

All hail to the successful completion of both of these translations and publishing projects, the "Orthodox Study Bible" and the N.E.T.S. English translation of the Greek Septuagint Old Testament! The O.S.B., for its part, makes the complete Greek Bible translated into English available for today's Anglophone readers, especially for the Orthodox faithful among them, as well as for other Christians, and the N.E.T.S., for its share of glory, provides, most of the time and despite some serious flaws, what is perhaps the most delightfully clear yet graciously worded English translation of the LXX Greek O.T. that has appeared to date!