CLAOTB: Greek Terminology

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Considering Lingual Aspects of the Bible:
Greek Terminology

 
For those looking at the length, about 30% of this document is Footnotes.

The journey to understanding the Greek New Testament involves accepting that the “Old Testament” (Tanakh) was the only written Scriptures until about AD/CE mid-first century, and was translated from the Hebrew into the Greek, with the Greek translation being a working part of Israelite life, especially for Jews in the Diaspora, Jews who spoke Greek.

The Septuagint is the Greek translation of the Hebrew Bible. The Septuagint (LXX) gets its name by referring to the seventy (or 72) Israelite scholars who traveled to Egypt to translate the Hebrew into Greek.

The translation process of taking the Hebrew into the Greek began in the third century BC/BCE. The scholars began with the Five Books of Moses, then translators made their way through the remainder of the Tanakh (Hebrew).

But the LXX does contain additional Greek manuscripts. For example, the Septuagint contains 1, 2, 3, and 4 Maccabees. Importantly, 1 and 2 Maccabees record the establishment of the Feast of Dedication (Chanukah or Festival of Lights), but the festival is directly mentioned in John 10.22.

Even though there is discussion surrounding the LXX, the importance of that Bible translation cannot be sufficiently underscored, for me, there are at least two reasons why.

One, the Greek used to translate the Hebrew into the Septuagint (LXX) is the same style of Greek found in the New Testament, Koine Greek.

Two, the New Testament incorporates material from the Septuagint. For example, in his Epistles, the Apostle Paul quotes from the Septuagint.

Here is a Table of Old Testament quotes in the New Testament, in English translation that helps by giving a side-by-side-by-side from the English to the Greek to the Hebrew, where the Greek and Hebrew are translated into English.

Here is “Paul the Paraphraser or Paul the Septuagint-Quoter?” It takes a look at the grammatical structure of 1 Corinthians 1.19, comparing Paul to the Masoretic Text and comparing Paul to the Septuagint.

Studies like those abound. My only point is that it seems that a great number of teachers of the New Testament seem unfamiliar with the Septuagint and the role the Septuagint plays in understanding the Koine Greek of the New Testament.

Simply stated the LXX is part of anthropological history. The LXX was translated decades (and parts of the LXX centuries) before Jesus began his work. As such, the LXX was a part of Jewish life long before Saul of Tarsus (Acts 9.11, otherwise known as the Apostle Paul, cf. Acts 13.9) went to Jerusalem to become a teacher.

This means that the Koine Greek used to write the New Testament had been around centuries before the Greek New Testament manuscripts had been penned.

In essence, the Koine Greek (the same style of Greek used in the Greek New Testament) had been a part of the life of many who studied the Koine Greek Bible translation of that time period (third century BC/BCE to middle of AD/CE first century), which did not include any writings from the New Testament.

In other words, Koine Greek was simply part of the Hellenistic Jewish world, where they would gather in synagogues (which is a Greek term itself), pray, and study from the Koine Greek translation of the Hebrew Bible.

That is why I begin my presentation of the Greek with the Septuagint.

Anthropologically, the Septuagint occurs prior to the New Testament.

Lingually, the Septuagint occurs prior to the New Testament.

Historically, the Septuagint is quoted by and incorporated into the New Testament.

Therefore, the Septuagint establishes a valuable literary aspect to the study of the Greek New Testament.

What I am going to do is take some examples from the section: Hebrew Terminology and show the Koine Greek (Septuagint, LXX) term used to translate the Hebrew term. As I go through the examples, I will provide additional thoughts.

In the following groups, I have retained example passages of the Hebrew terms ishshah and ish. As, I did in the previous sections, I replace the English term with the transliteration of the Hebrew term, by providing the root Hebrew term and therefore not show any variations based on grammatical variants (e.g. prefix, suffix).

Following the passage with the Hebrew term (H), I will replace the transliterated Hebrew term, with the transliterated Greek term (G), thereby providing the root Greek term, which will not show any variations based on grammatical variants (e.g. Case, Number).

The groups are not exhaustive to represent the entire range of the Old Testament (Tanakh) or the Koine Greek translation (Septuagint, LXX), but the examples are sufficient to establish my point that the Hebrew linguistics are consistent whereas the Greek contains terminology that must be considered and English alternates terminology.

When one examines the verses in the following lists with the KJV, one will find the English terms. Even though this is based on the KJV, I encourage my reader to have their English Bible for comparison.

 
Genesis 1.26-27
    H – “…Let us make adam in our image…” (H120, 1.26)
    G – “…Let us make anthropos in our image…” (G444, 1.26)

    H – “So God created adam in his own image…” (H120, 1.27)
    G – “So God created anthropos in his own image…” (G444, 1.27)

Genesis 2.7-8
    H – “…God formed adam of the dust…” (H120, 2.7)
    G – “…God formed anthropos of the dust…” (G444, 2.7)

    H – “…God planted a garden… and there he put adam…” (H120, 2.8)
    G – “…God planted a garden… and there he put anthropos…” (G444, 2.8)

In the above examples, the LXX used the Greek term anthropos to translate the Hebrew term adam.

According to Strong’s Definitions, the Greek term anthropos (ανθρωπος, G444) derives from the Greek term aner (ανηρ, G435) and the Greek term ops (ωψ, from G3700).

According to the Strong’s Definition, the Greek term aner primarily refers to the male human, which is used to refer to a “man”.

However, the Greek term aner can be used in a generic sense to refer to a group of men and women, therefore the Greek term aner can function as a gender neutral term.

According to the Strong’s Definition, the Greek term ops refers to the human face.

Therefore, the Strong’s Definition, the Greek term anthropos refers to the human countenance or to the human face, conveying the idea of “manfaced” or “human-faced”, which is used to refer to a human being.

Therefore, assuming accurate that information about word derivation, that means anthropos is a type of cognate derived from two different Greek terms: aner and ops.

Lingually, because the Greek term anthropos is derived from the masculine Greek term aner, the Greek term anthropos is technically masculine.

However, the Greek term anthropos can be used in the general sense to refer to any human, or to humanity as an entity, therefore the Greek term anthropos can function as a gender neutral term.

Interestingly, the Greek term anthropos lends itself to the English terms: anthropology, and anthropological.

 
In the following group, the LXX will do two different things. One will be translation, the other transliteration.
Genesis 2.15-16
    H – “…God took adam and put him in the garden…” (H120, 2.15)
    G – “…God took anthropos and put him in the garden…” (G444, 2.15)

    H – “…God commanded adam…” (H120, 2.16)
    G – “…God commanded Adam…” (G76, 2.16)

In Genesis 2.15, the LXX translated the Hebrew term adam the same as the LXX had done in the previous examples.

However, in Genesis 2.16, the LXX did not translate the Hebrew term adam. Instead, the LXX transliterated the Hebrew term adam by spelling the Hebrew term with Greek letters, becoming a Greek term itself: Adam (Αδαμ, G76).

Therefore, in Genesis 2.16, the LXX has the Greek reader read the verse as directly applying to the man named Adam. That is different than how the KJV translates the Hebrew.

 
Genesis 2.18
    H – “…God said ‘It is not good that adam should be alone…'” (H121, 2.18)
    G – “…God said ‘It is not good that anthropos should be alone…'” (G444, 2.18)

The KJV translates similar to the Greek.

 
Genesis 2.21-23
    H – “…God caused a deep sleep to fall upon Adam…” (H121, 2.21)
    G – “…God caused a deep sleep to fall upon Adam…” (G76, 2.21)

    H – “…the rib, …God had taken from adam…” (H120, 2.22a)
    G – “…the rib, …God had taken from Adam…” (G76, 2.22a)

    H – “….made he ishshah…” (H802, 2.22b)
    G – “….made he gune…” (G1135, 2.22b)

    H – “….and brought her unto adam.” (H120, 2.22c)
    G – “….and brought her unto Adam.” (G76, 2.22c)

    H – “…Adam said… she shall be called ishshah…” (H121, H802, 2.23a)
    G – “…Adam said… she shall be called gune…” (G76, G1135, 2.23a)

    H – “…because she was taken out of ish.” (H376, 2.23b)
    G – “…because she was taken out of aner.” (G435, 2.23b)

In Genesis 2.21, 2.22, and 2.23, the LXX transliterates the Hebrew term adam into the Greek term Adam, thereby allowing the Greek readers to read the verse as referring directly to the man Adam.

Contrastingly, in Genesis 2.22 the KJV translates the Hebrew term adam into the English term “man”.

Between the LXX and KJV translations, the translators chose to have Genesis 2.22 read differently to the different readers of two different languages.

Contextually, in this instance of Genesis 2.22, it is my studied conclusion, that the LXX is proper for transliterating the Hebrew term adam, and the KJV does a disservice to the English reader.

In Genesis 2.22, the LXX translates the Hebrew term ishshah into the Greek term gune (γυνη, G1135).

According to the Strong’s Definition, the Greek term gune refers to the female human, which is used to refer to a “woman”.

The Strong’s Definition provides speculation as the origin of the Greek term gune is from the Greek term ginomai (γινομαι, G1096), which is defined as “to become, i.e. to come into existence, begin to be, receive being”.

My lingual skills and research skills are not adequate enough for me to confirm or deny that speculation.

However, I can confirm that the Greek term gune represents the female human and the Greek term aner primarily represents the male human.

In that sense, the Greek term gune is like the English term “woman”, in the sense that the Greek term gune seems to predominately refer to the feminine.

Similarly, the Greek term aner is like the archaic English term “man”, in the sense that the Greek term aner and the archaic use of the English term “man” primarily referred to the individual male, but could be used to refer to a group of mixed gendered people, and could be used to refer to humanity in the generic sense.

Furthermore, I can confirm that the Hebrew term ishshah is a cognate of the Hebrew term ish.

Additionally, I can confirm that the English term “woman” is a cognate of the English term “man”.

Lingually, I can state that the Greek term gune is not a cognate of the Greek term aner.

That is important for Genesis 2.23. The English translation seems better capable of showing the cognate “woman” to “man” than the Greek translation can show any reason as to why gune is created from aner.

 
Genesis 2.24-25
    H – “Therefore shall ish leave his father and mother…” (H376, 2.24a)
    G – “Therefore shall anthropos leave his father and mother…” (G444, 2.24a)

    H – “…shall cleave unto his ishshah…” (H802, 2.24b)
    G – “…shall cleave unto his gune…” (G1135, 2.24b)

    H – “…they were both naked, adam and his ishshah…” (H120, H802, 2.25)
    G – “…they were both naked, Adam and his gune…” (G76, G1135, 2.25)

An issue to be seen with Genesis 2.24 is that the LXX does not translate the Hebrew term ish into the Greek term aner which refers primaril to the male.

If I had a choice, I would translate the Hebrew term ish into the Greek term aner.

However, that is not what the LXX did. So for students who want a more direct translation, the LXX provides an interesting point for pondering. It seems that the LXX is using the Greek term anthropos as a means to refer to the collective of all men as male humans.

For English readers, at least the English translates the Hebrew term ish into the English term “man”, which keeps it in line with the Hebrew.

Additionally for Genesis 2.24, the LXX uses the Greek term gune.

Lingually, keep in mind that the Greek term gune is not a cognate of the Greek term aner, but in translation the Greek term gune does function similar to the Hebrew term ishshah, in the sense that the Greek term gune seems to be found as gune.

In other words, when the Greek translators translated the Hebrew term ishshah, the Greek translators translated the Hebrew term ishshah into the Greek term gune, and only gune.

Why?

Because like Hebrew, Greek does not have two different terms, where one conveys “woman” and another conveys “wife”.

That is why the Greek term gune seems to be found as gune irrespective of verse.

In other words, the Hebrew to Greek translation seems to be a one-to-one translation: ishshah to gune, no matter the occurrence.

That is unlike the English.

When English translators translate the Hebrew term ishshah, and when English translators translate the Greek term gune, the English translators translate both ishshah and gune into two distinct English terms: “woman” and “wife”.

Therefore, the Hebrew to English translation seems to be a one-to-two translation: ishshah to “woman” or “wife”, depending on occurrence.

Furthermore, the Greek to English translation seems to be a one-to-two translation: gune to “woman” or “wife”, depending on occurrence.

That makes for difficult reading for English readers, when English readers assume that the translators are presenting a one-to-one translation.

Consider how the Greek translates the Hebrew in the next few examples:

Genesis 3.1-2
    H – “…he said unto ishshah…” (H802, 3.1)
    G – “…he said unto gune…” (G1135, 3.1)

    H – “And ishshah said…” (H802, 3.2)
    G – “And gune said…” (G1135, 3.2)

Genesis 3.4
    H – “…said unto ishshah…” (H802, 3.4)
    G – “…said unto gune…” (G1135, 3.4)

Genesis 3.6
    H – “And when ishshah saw…” (H802, 3.6a)
    G – “And when gune saw…” (G1135, 3.6a)

    H – “…she took… and gave also unto her ish…” (H376, 3.6b)
    G – “…she took… and gave also unto her aner…” (G435, 3.6b)

In other words, whether Genesis 2.24 or Genesis 3.1 or Genesis 3.2 or Genesis 3.4 or Genesis 3.6, the Greek is consistent, bringing the Hebrew term ishshah into the Greek term gune.

Therefore the Greek reader reads those five verses differently than how the English reader reads those five verses.

The result?

In using the Greek term gune, the Greek is consistent, one-to-one translations. But, that is because the Greek language had no choice, because there is no term in Biblical (Koine) Greek for “wife”.

However, the English is inconsistent, giving a one-to-two translation. Yet, the English language had (and has) a choice, and chose (and chooses) not to be consistent. This makes it difficult for the English Bible reader.

But the Greek translation of the Hebrew term ish is more complex.

First, the LXX translation of the Hebrew term ish is not one-to-one.

Instead, in the above examples, the LXX has translated the Hebrew term ish into two different Greek terms: anthropos (e.g. Genesis 2.24), and aner.

So in that instance, English and Greek seem to function similar by translating the Hebrew term ish into two different terms.

However, while the Greek translates the Hebrew term ish into two different Greek terms: anthropos and aner that situation is not the same as what the English does when it translates the Hebrew term ish into the English terms: “man” and “husband”.

In Genesis 2.24, when the Greek translated the Hebrew term ish into the Greek term anthropos, the Greek term seems to refer to the collective of all men as male humans, not the singular human male.

When the Greek translated the Hebrew term ish into the Greek term aner, the Greek still refers to the male but this time refers to the “man” in the singular, not the collective of all men as male humans.

That is tremendously different than the English translating the Hebrew term ish into “man” or “husband”, where modern English readers read a different understanding of each English term.

What that means is that while the LXX translators seem to take the Hebrew term ish into two different Greek terms: aner and anthropos, those two terms are similar in that they both refer to humanity, and primarily refer to the masculine.

That would be like the English translating the Hebrew term ish into the English terms: “man” and “mankind”.

Importantly, just as the English translates the Hebrew term ish into two different English terms: “man” and “husband”, the English also translates the Greek term aner into two different English terms: “man” and “husband”.

However, that is not done when the Greek translates the Hebrew.

As seen in the above examples, the Greek does seem to translate the Hebrew term ish into the Greek term anthropos, but what is important is that the the Greek term anthropos seems not to be ever translated into the English term “husband”.

Instead, it is the Greek term aner that is translated into the English term “husband”.

Therefore, it is important to notice that when the Greek translates the Hebrew term ish in both:

Genesis 2.23
“…because she was taken out of aner.”

and Genesis 3.6
“…she took… and gave also unto her aner…”

the Greek is consistent, in both verses the Greek term aner translates the Hebrew term ish. Two different verses, one Greek term used to translate the one Hebrew term.

But in the English is inconsistent. In Genesis 2.23, the English translates the Hebrew term ish into the English term “man” and in Genesis 3.6 the English translates the Hebrew term ish into the English term “husband”. Two different verses, two different English terms to translate one Hebrew term.

In using the Greek term aner, the Greek is consistent, one-to-one translation. But, that is because the Greek language had no choice, because there is no Biblical (Koine) Greek term for “husband”.

However, the English is inconsistent, giving a one-to-two translation. Yet, the English language had (and has) a choice, and chose (and chooses) not to be consistent. This makes it difficult for the English Bible reader.

I could go on discussing all the verses that I listed in the previous three sections (Hebrew Terminology, More Hebrew Terminology, and Even More Hebrew Terminology), but the above seems sufficient to establish my postulation for this section, which I will take into the next two sections.

My postulation:
In the Biblical (Koine) Greek, gune is gune;

and
in the Biblical (Koine) Greek, aner is aner.

That simply means that in the Biblical text, the Greek does not have two differing terms when referring to the female human and the Greek does not hae two differing terms when referring to the male human.

That permits the Greek reader to read the text, see the information, and determine for themselves how the Greek term is being used and determine for themselves how the “man” (aner) relates to the “woman” (gune).

Similar should be done in the English.

When discussing the Hebrew terms, I postulated:
the Hebrew term ish should be translated into one English term “man”

and
the Hebrew term ishshah should be translated into one English term “woman”

In this section, I postulate:
the Greek term aner should be translated into one English term “man”

and
the Greek term gune should be translated into one English term “woman”.

Why?

Because, as I have shown in this section, and as I will show in the next two sections, in the Greek aner is aner and in the Greek gune is gune.

The English reader needs to be able to find consistency in English terminology, allowing the English reader to read the verse for themselves, and determine for themselves how the “man” (aner) relates to the “woman” (gune).

In other words, translate the Koine Greek into “Koine” English.

 
 
Footnotes:
For those interested in how the Greek translated the Hebrew in the other passages, I think I have been able to show the LXX Greek translation for most, if not all, of the verses that were in the previous three sections.

In many places, the manner in which the LXX communicates its words are functionally in different locations. In order to maintain an easier comparison, I have retained the KJV verbage, for both the Hebrew (H) and the Greek (G).

In the following groups, I have retained example passages of the Hebrew terms ishshah and ish. As, I did in the previous sections, I replace the English term with the transliteration of the Hebrew term, by providing the root Hebrew term and therefore did not show any variations based on grammatical variants (e.g. prefix, suffix).

Following the passage with the Hebrew term, I will replace the transliterated Hebrew term, with the transliterated Greek term, thereby providing the root Greek term, which will not show any variations based on grammatical variants (e.g. Case, Number).

The groups are not exhaustive to represent the entire range of the Old Testament (Tanakh) or the Koine Greek translation (Septuagint, LXX), but the examples are sufficient to establish my point that the Hebrew linguistics are consistent whereas the Greek contains terminology that must be considered and English alternates terminology.

When one examines the verses in the following lists with the KJV, one will find the English terms. Even though this is based on the KJV, I encourage my reader to have their English Bible for comparison.

 
Genesis 3.8
H – “…Adam and his ishshah hid…” (H121, H802)
G – “…Adam and his gune hid…” (G76, G1135)

 
Genesis 3.12
H – “…ish said, ‘the ishshah whom…'” (H376, H802)
G – “…Adam said, ‘the gune whom…'” (G76, G1135)

 
Genesis 3.13
H – “…God said unto the ishshah…” (H802, 3.13a)
G – “…God said unto the gune…” (G1135, 3.13a)

H – “…ishshah said…” (H802, 3.13b)
G – “…gune said…” (G1135, 3.13b)

 
Genesis 3.15-17
H – “…between thee and ishshah…” (H802, 3.15)
G – “…between thee and gune…” (G1135, 3.15)

H – “Unto ishshah he said…” (H802, 3.16a)
G – “Unto gune he said…” (G1135, 3.16a)

H – “…and thy desire shall be to thy ish…” (H376, 3.16b)
G – “…and thy desire shall be to thy aner…” (G435, 3.16b)

H – “unto Adam he said…” (H121, 3.17a)
G – “unto Adam he said…” (G76, 3.17a)

H – “…the voice of thy ishshah…” (H802, 3.17b)
G – “…the voice of thy gune…” (G1135, 3.17b)

 
Genesis 3.20-22
H – “…Adam called his ishshah…” (H121, H802, 3.20)
G – “…Adam called his gune…” (G76, G1135, 3.20)

H – “Unto Adam also and to his ishshah…” (H121, H802, 3.21)
G – “Unto Adam also and to his gune…” (G76, G1135, 3.21)

H – “…Behold adam is become…” (H120, 3.22)
G – “…Behold Adam is become…” (G76, 3.22)

 
Genesis 3.24
H – “…he drove out adam…” (H120)
G – “…he drove out Adam…” (G76)

 
Genesis 9.6
H- “Whoso sheddeth adam‘s blood; by adam shall his blood be shed: for in the image of God made he adam.” (H120, H120, H120)
G- “Whoso sheddeth anthropos‘s blood; [LXX omits] shall his blood be shed: for in the image of God made he anthropos.” (G444, [LXX omits}, G444)

 
H – baal (H1167) (e.g. Exodus 21.34, Exodus 21.36)
G – kurios (G2962) (e.g. Exodus 21.34, Exodus 21.36)
E – “owner” (H1167) (e.g. Exodus 21.34, Exodus 21.36)

H – baal (H1167) (e.g. Exodus 21.22, Deuteronomy 21.13)
G – aner (G435) (e.g. Exodus 21.22, *Deuteronomy 21.13)
E – “husband” (H1167) (e.g. Exodus 21.22, Deuteronomy 21.13)
* – Deuteronomy 21.13 reads differently in LXX, the LXX seems not to include the phrase that would translate the Hebrew term baal

H – baal (H1167) (e.g. Exodus 24.14, Leviticus 21.4)
G – * ** (e.g. *Exodus 24.14, **Leviticus 21.4)
E – “man” (e.g. Exodus 24.14 KJV, Leviticus 21.4 KJV)
* – Exodus 24.14 reads differently in LXX, it appears that the LXX uses the Greek term τινι (a variant of τις, G5100) meaning “anyone” to translate the Hebrew term baal, seems this could be where the ESV finds its source for its translation of “whoever” to translate the Hebrew term baal
** – Leviticus 21.4 reads differently in LXX, meaning the LXX does not seem to include the phrase that would translate the Hebrew term baal; Leviticus 21.4 ESV uses the English term “husband”

 
Genesis 7.13
H – “…Noah’s ishshah…” (H802)
G – “…Noah’s gune…” (G1135)

Genesis 16.1
H – “…Sarai, Abram’s ishshah…” (H802)
G – “…Sarai, Abram’s gune…” (G1135)

Genesis 17.15
H – “…Abraham,… your ishshah…[call her] Sarah…” (H802)
G – “…Abraham,… your gune…[call her] Sarah…” (G1135)

Genesis 25.1
H – “…Abraham took a[n] ishshah… [named] Keturah.” (H802)
G – “…Abraham took a[n] gune… [named] Keturah.” (G1135)

Genesis 25.20
H – “…Isaac… took Rebekah to ishshah…” (H802)
G – “…Isaac… took Rebekah to gune…” (G1135)

Genesis 29.21
H – “…Jacob said… Give me my ishshah” (H802)
G – “…Jacob said… Give me my gune” (G1135)

Exodus 18.2
H – “…Zipporah, Moses’ ishshah…” (H802)
G – “…Zipporah, Moses’ gune…” (G1135)

Exodus 20.17
H – “…thou shalt not covet thy neighbor’s ishshah…” (H802)
G – “…thou shalt not covet thy neighbor’s gune…” (G1135)

Deuteronomy 5.21
H – “Neither shalt thou desire thy neighbor’s ishshah…” (H802)
G – “Neither shalt thou desire thy neighbor’s gune…” (G1135)

 
Genesis 24.8
H – “…if the ishshah will not…” (H802)
G – “…if the gune will not…” (G1135)

Genesis 24.44
H – “…be the ishshah… for… [Isaac]” (H802)
G – “…be the gune… for… [Isaac]” (G1135)

Exodus 2.9
H – “…the ishshah took the child…” (H802)
G – “…the gune took the child…” (G1135)

Leviticus 12.2
H – “…if a[n] ishshah have conceived…” (H802)
G – “…if a[n] gune have conceived…” (G1135)

Numbers 5.24
H – “…cause the ishshah to drink…” (H802)
G – “…cause the gune to drink…” (G1135)

Deuteronomy 22.14
H – “…this ishshah…not a maid” (H802)
G – “…this gune…not a maid” (G1135)

 
Genesis 12.11 KJV
H – “…Sarah his ishshah… [was] a fair ishshah to look upon…” (H802, H802)
G – “…Sarah his gune… [was] a fair gune to look upon…” (G1135, G1135)

Deuteronomy 21.11 KJV
H – “…seest… a beautiful ishshah… and [desire]… her to thy ishshah…” (H802, H802)
G – “…seest… a beautiful gune… and [desire]… her to thy gune…” (G1135, G1135)

 
Genesis 29.32
H – “…Leah… said… my ish…” (H376)
G – “…Leah… said… my aner…” (G435)

Leviticus 21.3
H – “…which hath had no ish…” (H376)
G – “…which hath had no aner…” (G435)

Numbers 30.6
H – “…if she had at all a[n] ish…” (H376)
G – “…if she had at all a[n] aner…” (G435)

Deuteronomy 28.56
H – “…toward the ish of her bosom…” (H376)
G – “…toward the aner of her bosom…” (G435)

 
Genesis 24.16
H – “…neither had any ish known her…” (H376)
G – “…neither had any aner known her…” (G435)

Genesis 24.26
H – “…the ish… worshipped the LORD.” (H376)
G – “…the anthropos… worshipped the LORD.” (G444)

Genesis 25.8
H – “…Abraham… died… an old ish…” (H376)
G – “…Abraham… died… an old presbutes…” (G4246)

Genesis 25.27
H – “…a cunning hunter, a[n] ish of the field…” (H376)
G – “…a cunning hunter, a[n] anthropos of the field…” (G444)

Exodus 2.21
H – “…Moses was content to dwell with the ish…” (H376)
G – “…Moses was content to dwell with the anthropos…” (G444)

Leviticus 1.2 KJV
H – “…if any ish…” (H376)
G – “…if any anthropos…” (G444)

Numbers 1.52
H – “…every ish by his own camp…” (H376)
G – “…every aner by his own camp…” (G435)

Deuteronomy 3.11 KJV
H – “…after the cubit of a[n] ish.” (H376)
G – “…after the cubit of a[n] aner.” (G435)

 
Deuteronomy 22.23 KJV
H – “If a damsel… be betrothed unto an ish, and a[n] ish… lie with her” (H376)
H – “If a damsel… be betrothed unto an aner, and a[n] anthropos… lie with her” (G435, G444)

From my research, that verse seems to be the only time that the LXX translates the Hebrew term ish into two distinct Greek terms within the same verse. The LXX’s use of the Greek term anthropos may be a means to refer to the collective of all men as male humans.

Numbers 5.13 KJV
H – “…a[n] ish lie with her carnally, and it be hid from… her ish…” (H376)
G – “…a[n] tis lie with her carnally, and it be hid from… her aner…” (G5100, G435)

That verse reveals an interesting LXX translation. Previously in the Footnotes groups in Exodus 24.14 the LXX used “anyone” (G5100). In translating with the concept of anyone, the LXX may interpret the Hebrew term ish as applying to any human.

 
Deuteronomy 25.11 KJV
H – “…When men [fight] together… and the ishshah… to deliver her ish…”. (H802, H376)
G – “…When men [fight] together… and the gune… to deliver her aner…”. (G1135, G435)

 
Leviticus 21.7 KJV
H – “not take a[n] ishshah… [or] ishshah put away from her ish…”. (H802, H802, H376)
G – “not take a[n] gune… [or] gune put away from her aner…”. (G1135, G1135, G435)

Share