Rating: 
Summary: It is a valuable resource to scholars.
Review: An excellent reference for biblical and patristical scholars. This work will prove to be a useful source for reveiwing new testament parallels.
Rating:
Summary: A must for those studying Koine Greek
Review: An incredible resource for all Bible students (schooled or self-curious). The Deuterocanonical books, in addition to those inspired books, truly gives a greater knowledge of the creation of the canonical Bible...and is just plain interesting to read. I've found my understanding and study of Biblical Greek increased by this book. An excellent tool.
Rating:
Summary: My thoughts (and response to Jason C. Taylor's review)
Review: Having several members of my family involved with the Jehovah's Witnesses, and having had many religious discussions with them, I recognize your comments as those of a member of the Watchtower Society.I would like to point out the double standard you manifest in your comments. With regard to Brenton translating the tetragram (YHWH) as "the Lord", you said: ---- "Brenton, as a translator, should have acknowledged the seriousness of producing a Bible translation, translating Hebrew into Greek with utmost dignity and respect..." ---- and: ---- "Displaying a religiously biased style, it is evident that Brenton had no intention of making the true thoughts and ideas that the scriptures were meant to convey available for the reader." ---- I wish to draw your attention to the fact that the Watchtower Society, in their own 'New World Translation' bible, inserted the name "Jehovah" into the inspired New Testament text 237 times when in fact it is not found even once in any Greek NT manuscript available today. By altering the original reading of the Greek text, did the Watchtower Society translate "with utmost dignity and respect"? They did not. In fact, they demonstrated a "religiously biased style". It is also evident that they "had no intention of making the true thoughts and ideas that the scriptures were meant to convey available for the reader".
Rating: 
Summary: Brenton's Septuagent with Apocrypha
Review: Having studied Brenton's LXX for the past year, I found it most enlightening. Comparing references in the English New Testament with the Old Testament text, I discovered 45 instances where the NT references correspond perfectly with the LXX, but have little resemblance to the Hebrew text used in our western bibles. The only problems are (1) The small print, and (2) the Apocrypha was removed from the main text, and inserted after Malachi (in accordance with Martin Luther's practice). Hopefully, a new English translation of the LXX will be forthcoming.
Rating:
Summary: A Must for Bible Students
Review: I don't know how the subject of the Jehovah's Witnesses or the New World Translation have entered into the discussion of the LXX, but a few thoughts should be brought out in the open. The Divine Name is in all known copies of the Septuagint before the middle of the second century. The first-century copies of Theodotion and Aquila have it. I cannot think of a single Greek translation before the middle of the second century that does not have a form of either the Tetragrammaton (YHWH) or the Greek transliteration IAW. "We know that the the Greek Bible text [the Septuagint] as far as it was written by Jews for Jews did not translate the Divine Name by Kyrios, but the Tetragrammaton written with Hebrew or Greek letters was retained in such MSS. It was the Christians who replaced the Tetragrammaton by Kyrios, when the divine name written in Hebrew letters was not understood anymore". (Dr. P. Kahle, The Cairo Geniza, Oxford, 1959, p.222) "The removal of the Tetragrammaton from the New Testament and its replacement with the surrogates KYRIOS and THEOS blurred the original distinction between the Lord God and the Lord Christ, and in many passages made it impossible which one was meant. ..Once the Tetragrammaton was removed and replaced by the surrogate 'Lord', scribes were unsure whether "lord" meant God or Christ. As time went on, these two figures were brought into even closer unity until it was often impossible to distinguish between them. Thus it may be that the removal of the Tetragrammaton contributed significantly to the later Christological and Trinitarian debates which plagued the church of the early Christian centuries." George Howard, The Name of God in the New Testament. The NWT was certainly not the first, nor the last to restore the Divine Name to the NT. In fact, the oldest NT mss I own is Shem Tov's Matthew (1385 AD), and it contains the Name. Perhaps a little more education and a little less bigotry will go a long way to appreciating a Bible with the fullest potential for accuracy...and yes, buy Brenton's LXX, as it is a must for Bible students. Feel free to write to me at (email address)
Rating:
Summary: Please do not use the review column for religious debates!!!
Review: I have been learning Koine Greek for about two years and this is one of the most valuable editions to my study. I haven't read the whole thing yet (has anybody?) but have already gained valuable insight into the Greek language and the (possible) use of the LXX in the New Testament. I believe pretty strongly that they best way to learn Greek is to read read read Greek. Read as much as possible. This book provides not only thousand upon thousand of stories in Greek, but stories from the actual inspired Bible at that. It shows grammar and syntax that is slightly different then the NT, and that you only read about in books. It also is a great way to do word studies (as many commentators do), giving many examples of how words that are sparse in the NT where used in the Koine Greek language. As a physical book, it is also of nice quality. Its think (and good looking) binding will stand the test of time, but it does make it hard to open as freely as you might want. The pages are of good quality (while not perfectly smooth). The printing is a little small and you will find various printing errors were words were blurred out. All and all it is good quality. The translation on the side is from 1851 and is slightly archaic. This is hardly consequential though since the purpose is to read the Greek, not the English. I am happy to say that this is not an interlinear, which would defeat the purpose of learning Greek in the first place and just provide you with yet another translation. Just as a note, I intend on learning Hebrew soon, and hope to first check my Hebrew understanding of passages with the Greek and then the English. Hopefully, in this way I will strengthen my Greek understanding while learning Hebrew. Of course, I also could just be confusing my understanding two degrees instead of one, but hey . . . let's have a little fun.
Rating:
Summary: fun fun fun
Review: I have been learning Koine Greek for about two years and this is one of the most valuable editions to my study. I haven't read the whole thing yet (has anybody?) but have already gained valuable insight into the Greek language and the (possible) use of the LXX in the New Testament. I believe pretty strongly that they best way to learn Greek is to read read read Greek. Read as much as possible. This book provides not only thousand upon thousand of stories in Greek, but stories from the actual inspired Bible at that. It shows grammar and syntax that is slightly different then the NT, and that you only read about in books. It also is a great way to do word studies (as many commentators do), giving many examples of how words that are sparse in the NT where used in the Koine Greek language. As a physical book, it is also of nice quality. Its think (and good looking) binding will stand the test of time, but it does make it hard to open as freely as you might want. The pages are of good quality (while not perfectly smooth). The printing is a little small and you will find various printing errors were words were blurred out. All and all it is good quality. The translation on the side is from 1851 and is slightly archaic. This is hardly consequential though since the purpose is to read the Greek, not the English. I am happy to say that this is not an interlinear, which would defeat the purpose of learning Greek in the first place and just provide you with yet another translation. Just as a note, I intend on learning Hebrew soon, and hope to first check my Hebrew understanding of passages with the Greek and then the English. Hopefully, in this way I will strengthen my Greek understanding while learning Hebrew. Of course, I also could just be confusing my understanding two degrees instead of one, but hey . . . let's have a little fun.
Rating: 
Summary: I need "mingshey's" e-mail address.
Review: I will not use this page, which is designed for book reviews, to argue, 'mingshey'. Provide me with your e-mail address and we'll talk seriously.
Rating:
Summary: The issue of proper translation...
Review: It appears to me that the issue here raised was not the presence or absence of the Divine Name, per se. Rather, the issue raised was that of proper translation. Brenton, the translator, was being criticized for not including some form of the Tetragrammaton in his translation. The job of a translator of any kind is to *translate* the words before him, and not to go beyond that. His job is not to suppose, or assume. The fact that some "early" fragmentary Greek OT translations (i.e. Aquila fragments) include the tetragrammaton (Hebrew consonants) does not then give the translator license to freely insert the name "Jehovah" throughout his entire LXX translation in each place he feels it *should* (but does not) appear. Regarding translations of the New Testament (such as the Jehovah's Witnesses 'New World Translation', and some Hebrew translations from the fourteenth century A.D.), the same principle applies. Since no form of the Tetragrammaton appears in even a single extant Greek NT MSS, it is incorrect (or at least, conjecture) to say any New Testament translator "restored" the Divine Name to the NT. Rather, some New Testament translators have inserted the Divine Name into the New Testament text in places where they feel it *should* (but does not) appear. This is called speculation, not translation.
Rating:
Summary: The issue of proper translation...
Review: It appears to me that the issue here raised was not the presence or absence of the Divine Name, per se. Rather, the issue raised was that of proper translation. Brenton, the translator, was being criticized for not including some form of the Tetragrammaton in his translation. The job of a translator of any kind is to *translate* the words before him, and not to go beyond that. His job is not to suppose, or assume. The fact that some "early" fragmentary Greek OT translations (i.e. Aquila fragments) include the tetragrammaton (Hebrew consonants) does not then give the translator license to freely insert the name "Jehovah" throughout his entire LXX translation in each place he feels it *should* (but does not) appear. Regarding translations of the New Testament (such as the Jehovah's Witnesses 'New World Translation', and some Hebrew translations from the fourteenth century A.D.), the same principle applies. Since no form of the Tetragrammaton appears in even a single extant Greek NT MSS, it is incorrect (or at least, conjecture) to say any New Testament translator "restored" the Divine Name to the NT. Rather, some New Testament translators have inserted the Divine Name into the New Testament text in places where they feel it *should* (but does not) appear. This is called speculation, not translation.
| 
