English LXXs...only one?

MJ. Smith said:

Unix said:

I use neither Brenton nor LES.

I suspect that is true for most of us and will become more so as some of the current Orthodox translation projects are completed.

Sounds like Logos needs to get on the stick.

David Paul · May 2013

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/490597#Comment_490597

Unix said:

I use neither Brenton nor LES.

How helpful! [:)]

Gabe Martini (Faithlife) · May 2013

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/490602#Comment_490602

There aren't many English translations of the Septuagint available, and Logos currently offers most of them.

The other ones out there are the New English Translation of the Septuagint (NETS) from Oxford, with the NRSV as the base text, and the St Athanasius Academy translation found in the Orthodox Study Bible (Thomas Nelson, now Harper Collins), with the NKJV as the base text.

The NETS is very scholarly, but difficult to read, given their translation choices regarding proper names and places (the Lexham English Septuagint has the upper hand here). The OSB is not a complete translation of the Septuagint, and often goes with Masoretic readings in places where the translators have deemed acceptable. For me, I either want the Septuagint or I don't -- not a mixture of both.

That said, we are working to bring every major edition to Logos, and I will keep you posted on the progress. This is, of course, very important to Orthodox Christians.

P.S. When the Old Testament of the Eastern/Greek Orthodox Bible is available (NT now in Pre-Pub), we will offer that as well.

Bruce Dunning · May 2013

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/490604#Comment_490604

Gabe Martini said:
P.S. When the Old Testament of the Eastern/Greek Orthodox Bible is available (NT now in Pre-Pub), we will offer that as well.

That sounds interesting.

David Ames · May 2013

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/490597#Comment_490597

What do you use or do you avoid the LXX? Before 400 it was the OT that was used.

Then someone got tricked by the Jews into changing to the Hebrew from the Greek.

Unix said:

I use neither Brenton nor LES.

Unix · May 2013

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/490604#Comment_490604

I use the NETS in Accordance. I thought that it will never be in Logos since Logos has its own translation to promote.

It does resemble the NRSV in its style: http://www.christianforums.com/t7653202-post60820357/#post60820357 ... and that is its only weakness, as the NRSV is so mainstream and I don't like that (even the RSV is better, and some other versions even much better - for example the Revised English Bible and the Jerusalem Bible Reader's Edition). Btw, childofdust is a Bible translator. But I wouldn't say that it has the NRSV as its base text - but do read that comment at Christianforums!

I like the LXX very much for several books. For now I use NETS. I have the Göttingen Septuagint on one computer and will use it in the future. For Sirach, I use the REB for the parts that have been found in Hebrew:

David Ames said:
What do you use or do you avoid the LXX? Before 400 it was the OT that was used.

Then someone got tricked by the Jews into changing to the Hebrew from the Greek:
Unix said:
I use neither Brenton nor LES.

Gabe Martini said:
The other ones out there are the New English Translation of the Septuagint (NETS) from Oxford, with the NRSV as the base text,

Rick Brannan · May 2013

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/490622#Comment_490622

Unix said:
I thought that [NETS] will never be in Logos since Logos has its own translation to promote.

Having our own translation of something (here the LXX) is not reason to think that Logos will never ever make another LXX English translation available.

Regarding the relationship between NETS and NRSV, the general introduction to NETS explains it fairly well. They are related, and NRSV was the starting point for NETS. That said, the end product (NETS) is not nearly so closely related to the NRSV as the OSB text is to the NKJV (as Gabe points out).

With NETS, you have to research their translation methodology (the "interlinear" method, as they describe it) and determine if you think it is appropriate. The other question you have to ask yourself with LXX translations is should the translation translate the Greek as Greek, or is the translation an opportunity to translate some sort of possibly-recoverable underlying Hebrew vorlage of the LXX?

The LES translates the Greek as Greek. And even though it started out as an interlinear, it does not use the 'interlinear' methodology of NETS; it is instead a fairly literal translation of the LXX.

Hope it helps.