Talk:Territorial Spirit
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] Deuteronomy 32:8 - "Sons of God" vs. "Sons of Adam (or Man)"
"Deuteronomy 32:8-9
In both the Septuagint and the Dead Sea Scrolls Deuteronomy 32:8-9 refers a time when God divided the nations of the earth among the "sons of God"..."
Most of the translations I've checked state "sons of Adam" or "sons of man". What reference did the writer use that stated "sons of God"? "Sons of Adam" would be human, while "sons of God" could refer to angels or these territorial spirits, so the meaning of this passage hinges on which phrase is correct. Vince66.210.33.200 17:19, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
- Hi, I'm the writer that included the Deut. 32:8-9 reference. Most widely available editions of the LXX are based on later manuscripts (sort of like LXX versions of the Textus Receptus) and most of these do indeed speak of "sons of Israel", and at times, "angles of God". But more recently compiled critical editions of the LXX (like the Gottingen Septuagint) prefer "sons of God" as the most ancient of the textual variants. The New International Version of the Bible indicates this in a footnote[1] while the English Standard Version places "Sons of God" in the body of the translation while relegating the "sons of Israel" variant to a footnote [2]. A good overview of the issue can be found at the following link: [3] Eugeneacurry 18:23, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
Then it needs to be rewritten. If the vast majority of Biblical translations render it "sons of men" or similar phrases, the leap to angelic beings is too far to includ yet. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.206.112.92 (talk) 05:28, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
- It is a cardinal tenet of textual criticism that the older reading is to be preferred over the more common text type. This can be seen in the shift away from the Byzantine text-type (which is by far the most ubiquitous), upon which the King James Version is based, to the Alexandrian text-type of the New Testament. The link provided above provides sufficient documentation of the superiority of the variant reading of Deut. 32:8-9 and so, without further documentary evidence, the reference shall remain in the article. Eugeneacurry 17:10, 28 October 2007 (UTC)