348

Job 3 in the Masoretic Text and the Septuagint

Robert A lthann

The current standard Greek translation of the Hebrew book of Job owes
much to the work of Origen in the 3rd century A.D. Origen in his Hexapla
set out to compare the Septuagint (LXX) with the Hebrew and with the
Greek translations of Aquila, early 2nd century A.D., Theodotion, middle of
the 2nd century A.D., and Symmachus, later still, but no date has been estab-
lished. Of the most ancient Greek version of the book of Job we have only
indirect evidence. It existed by about 100 B.C. and is attested in scattered
quotations in the Latin Fathers as well as in the Coptic-Sahidic Version
made in Upper Egypt, although this version may show signs of revision
(Dhorme 1926: clvii-clxiv). Origen himself tried to produce a Greek version
as close as possible, quantitatively, to the Hebrew Bible, but in doing this
carefully indicated which passages were missing in the LXX (with an aster-
isk) and which were not found in the Hebrew (with an obelus). It has been
estimated that some 389 stichs are not present in the Old Greek (OG) of
Job, a number obtained by subtracting the stichs bearing an asterisk in the
Hexapla, most of which derived from Theodotion (Ziegler 1982: 150-151;
Gentry 1995; 1998a; 1998b). The matter is, however, more complicated due
to the technique of the translator who on the one hand does not always
translate stich by stich and on the other frequently renders his text quite
freely (Fernández Marcos 1994: 254-255; Gorea 2007: 226-228). Driver
and Gray (1921 : lxxv) judge that the OG is not missing any stichs in Job 3
and the study of Gorea does not treat verses in this chapter. It is then the
intention of this article to consider some of the divergences between the MT
and the LXX in chapter 3 of the book of Job and to examine possible rea-
sons for them, in this way supplementing an earlier examination of the He-
brew text of Job 3 (Althann 1997: 121-153).

Job 3,3
‫‘יאבד יום אולד בו‬
‫והללה אמר הרה גבר‬
V T T ‫־‬ T T ‫ ן‬- ‫־‬ :

Perish the day on which I was bom

and the night that said, ‘A man has been conceived’.
 Job 3 in the Masoretic Text and the Septuagint 349

,Άπόλοιτο ή ήμερα, έν η έγεννήθην

.καί ή νυξ, έν η είπαν ’Ιδού άρσεν
,Let the day perish on which I was bom
!and the night in which they said, Behold a male
.The Hebrew text of this verse shows clear indications of poetic style
There is in the first place parallelism : ‫הרה גבר‬//‫הלילה ;אולד‬//‫ \ום‬-Also pres
ent is the ballast variant (Watson 1986: 343-8(: ‫ יאבד‬governs both stichs
-and so lacks an equivalent in the second. We therefore find that the paral
lei expressions in the second stich are longer than their equivalents in the
first. The first parallel pair employs a syllable count 1:4 and the second
The second pair’s word count is 1:2. The word count of the two stichs .3:4
-is 4:4, the syllable count 7:10. Another indication of poetry is the omis
sion of the relative pronoun before ‫אמר‬. Muraoka notes that asyndetic
relative clauses are found especially in poetry and elevated prose (Joüon
.)*and Muraoka 2006: §158a
The OG diverges in various ways from the MT. The translator offers
Ιδού άρσεν, ‘Behold a male’ for MT, ‫הרה גבר‬, ‘-A man has been con
ceived’. The OG here is referring to birth, whereas MT goes back to
conception and in this way v.3 produces a merismus: conception + birth
express the entire coming to be of the hero. Furthermore, ‘night’ and
darkness’ constitute a theme in what follows up to v.10. The OG simply‘
repeats the first half of the verse in the second half, employing different
,words. In the first half of the verse ‘day’ is employed in a general sense
,in the second the particular part of the day is specified. Driver (1921: II
points out that the translator may have read consonantal )16-17 ‫ הרה‬as ‫הרי‬,
Mishnaic Hebrew for ‘behold’, while Gray (ibid. II, 17) notes that ‫ גבר‬is
.?never rendered άρσην, in Job ten times by άνήρ and once by άνθρωπο
,The translator may have felt that άνθρωπο? was an inappropriate term but
’as Driver (ibid. I; 31) points out, Job is speaking as a poet, and ‘man
-could refer to what Job essentially is rather than to the stage of develop
ment he has reached (cf. John 16,21). The subject of ‫ אמר‬is impersonal in
-OG είπαν, a rendering which suggests that the translator does not recog
nize the asyndetic relative clause. The evidence for a different Vorlage is
not conclusive and it seems quite possible that the rendering of the OG
has been influenced by the translator’s exegesis. The Greek version lacks
.the tight structure of the Hebrew and is prosaic rather than poetic

Job 3,5
‫יגאלהו חשך וצלמות‬
‫זכךעליו עננה ז‬2<‫ת‬
‫כמרירי יום‬
. . . ‫יבעתהו‬
V ‫־‬: ‫! ־‬
350 Robert Althann

!Let darkness and death,s shadow reclaim it

!Let a pall hang over it
Let demons of the day terrify it! (Habel 1985:
Noegel ;98-99 2007: 558(.
,έκλάβοι 8è αύτήν σκότος καί σκιά θανάτου
.?έπέλθοι έπ’ αύτήν γνόφο
;But let darkness and the shadow of death seize it
.let blackness come upon it

The three stichs exhibit full parallelism: the two nouns of the first stich
being balanced by ‫ עננה‬in the second and, apparently, by ‫ כמרירי יום‬in the
third. The three verbs are similarly in parallel. The syllable count is
while the word pattern is ,10:7:9 3:3:3. ‫עננה‬, usually ‫ענן‬, is in this form a
hapaxlegomenon. The sense is specific, ‘a cloud’ rather than the more
general ‘cloud5 (GKC §122t). The danger becomes concrete. The climax
then comes in the third stich with ‫ כמדיו־י יום‬inspiring terror. For ‫כמךיךי יום‬,
-whose meaning has been much discussed, Noegel (2007: 556-562) devel
.’oping a proposal of older Jewish commentators, suggests ‘day-demons
-There is clearly a progression of fear in the verse from the general atmos
’phere of gloom and deepest darkness to the more concrete ‘cloud’ or ‘pall
of the second stich to the ‫ כמךיךי יום‬of the climax who bring terror into the
.immediate vicinity of the victim
It can be seen that the OG omits the third stich and so the climax in the
MT, perhaps opining that the content was already sufficiently expressed in
the first two stichs, if indeed the translator understood ‫כמרירי יום‬
7 . . . . . at all.
There is in fact no climax in the OG, since γνόφ 0 5 is hardly stronger than
-σκιά θανάτου. This would then be an instance of paraphrase by the trans
.lator who reproduces only the general sense of the Hebrew poetry

Job 3,6-7
‫הלילה ההוא ילןחהו אפל‬
‫ונה‬2<‫אל־יחך בימי‬
‫במספר ירחיםזאל־יבא‬
T ‫־‬ * TS “ 5 * 8

‫הגה הלללה ההוא יהי גלמוד‬

‫אל־תב^רננה בו‬
τ T S T

That night! Let sinister dark take it!

Let it not be counted in the days of the year!
Let it not appear in any of the months!
Oh, that night! Let it be barren!
Let no joyful sound penetrate it!
 Job 3 in the Masoretic Text and the Septuagint 351

,καταραθείη ή ήμερα και ή νύζ έκείνη

άπενέγκαι,το αύτήν σko to s ‫־‬
μή είη εις■ ήμέρα? ένιαυτοΰ
μηδε άριθμηθείη εί5 ήμερα? μηνών
,άλλα ή νυξ εκείνη εϊη όδύνη
·καί μή <ίλθοι έπ’ αΰτήν ευφροσύνη μηδε χαρμονή
,Let that day and night be cursed
;let darkness carry them away
,let it not come into the days of the year
.neither let it be numbered with the days of the months
,But let that night be pain
.and let not mirth come upon it, norjoy

In the MT of v.6 the second and third stichs are in chiastic parallel:
‫ אל־יחד‬is balanced by ‫אל־;ב'א‬, rqÿ ‫ בימי‬by ‫?מקופר ירחים‬. The syllable pattern
is 11:7:9, while each stich contains four words. In v.7 the syllable count is
the word pattern 5:4. The OG diverges from this text. In the MT Job ,9:7
-begins his speech by cursing both day and night (v.3). In w.4-5 he con
siders the day and in v.6 then turns to the night. The OG however adds
-day to the subject night in the opening of v.6, which leads to a grammati
cal inconcinnity when it returns to the singular subject in the rest of the
verse. The OG is evidently reminding the reader that Job has cursed both
.day and night in v.3. The MT on the other hand remains with the night
For ‫ תגה‬the OG offers ευφροσύνη μηδέ χαρμονή .
‫יהד‬, ‘let it (not) rejoice’ (from ‫ (חדה‬of the Massoretes does not seem to
offer a good parallel to ‫ ;בא‬-in the parallel stich and is frequently revocal
ized XT, deriving from ‫יחד‬, ‘,join’. Rendsburg (1982: 48-51), however
argues that we may here have a case of polysemy, with ‫ ?בא‬similarly
signifying not only ‘enter’ but also ‘desire’. Gordis (1978: 34) observes
chiasmus in w 6b-7b, with v.6b//7b (no rejoicing), and 6c//7a, where
,loneliness is paralleled by sterility. The OG on the other hand renders €Ϊη
reading ‫ יהי‬-in v.6b and offering άριθμηθείη in v.6c, obviating this discus
sion. It may be added that in v.7 MT ‫גלמוד‬, ‘solitary, lonely’ appears as
όδύνη, ‘pain’, so that the correspondences noted in the MT between w 6
.and 7 do not feature in the OG

Job 3,14
‫עס־מלכים ויעצי ארץ‬
‫הבנים חרבות למיוי‬
T TT! ·

With kings and counsellors of earth

who build ruins for themselves.
352 Robert Althann

μετά βασιλέων βουλευτών γή9 ,

,οΐ ήγαυριώντο έπι ζίφεσιν
With kings counsellors of earth
.who gloried in swords

This verse could, out of context, be construed as prose. The only factor
that might suggest poetry is the omission of the definite article before ‫ארץ‬,
.although this may be explained as due to the indefinite status of the noun
The observation is, nevertheless, not without significance. Freedman
pointed out that the article appears much less frequently in )6-7 :1977(
poetry than in prose and Sama (1996: 283) later studied the use of the
-definite article in the poetry of the book of Job, showing that it is fre
quently omitted but concluding that ‘the presence or absence of the article
defies systematization’. The syllable count is 9:8 and the word pattern 4:3 .
The OG follows the MT exactly in the first stich but diverges in the second.
‫ הבנים‬derives from the root ‫בנה‬, ‘,to build, rebuild’. The translation
Who rebuild ruins for themselves’ is criticized by Driver‘ ) 1921: 1,37(,
‘This, however, yields a poor sense; kings do not usually attain fame by
re-building ruined sites’. To this one can reply that ‘Mesopotamian kings
frequently boasted of their accomplishments in restoring and rebuilding
-ancient ruins’ (Pope 1973: 32; cf. Isa 58,12; 61,4). Clines (1989: 72) ren
ders ‘who rebuilt ruined cities’, judging that ‫ חרבות‬.includes this nuance
-Habel (1985: 102), on the other hand, offers, ‘who build ruins for them
selves’, arguing that the poet is here using a literary device and referring
to the future fate of the fine edifices. It can be seen that though there are
.differences in the way scholars view this stich the MT is retained
The OG on the other hand provides a translation that makes easy sense
but suggests a reading ‫) הרנים חרבות‬Lust 1992: 87a) which requires a small
change in the consonantal text: from ‫ הבנים‬to ‫הרנים‬. It is, however, quite
likely that the translator, as many after him, felt dissatisfaction with the
-Hebrew and changed one letter to produce a translation he judged satisfac
tory. The image of the MT is, if difficult, also more striking. Whereas the
.swords’ have disappeared, the ‘ruins’ remain for all to see and ponder‘

Job 3,18
‫חד אסירים שאננו‬:
‫גמעו קול נגען‬2<‫לא‬
The captives rest together,
they hear not the voice of the taskmaster.
 Job 3 in the Masoretic Text and the Septuagint 353

όμοθυμαδόν Sé oí αιώνιοι
·οΰκ ήκουσαν φωνήν φορολόγου
And the men of old have together
.ceased to hear the voice of the tax-gatherer
This verse too looks prosaic, but we notice the absence of the definite
article in the MT. The syllable count is 9:7, the word pattern 3:4. The
Greek corresponds well to the traditional Hebrew text, except for αιώνιοι
for the ‫ אםיךים‬of the MT. The older commentators discussed the meaning
of αιώνιοι at length (see the summary of discussion in Schleusner 1829:
One suggestion is that the translator read .)1,107-108 ‫אעזו־ים‬, ‘the blessed5
who are for eternity (Cappellus). In the light of Greek mythology, Nilsson
suggests the meaning is supernatural beings and Fernández )1956:11,481(
Marcos (1994: 259) renders ‘demons5. There remains the question of why
the translator felt it necessary to make the change. It is unlikely that he did
not know the meaning of ‫אסיו־ים‬, though it occurs only here in the book of
Job. It appears several times in Psalms and in the Prophets, while in 36,8
we find πεπ6δημένοι as a translation for ‫אסורים‬, ‘)bound’. Lust (1992: 14a
? observes two other cases in the book where the OG uses a form of αιώνιο
but the MT offers something different: Job 33,12: αιώνιο? for MT ‫אלוה‬
)‫מ(אנוש‬, ‘God than (man)’ and 21,11: αιώνια for MT ‫ויליהם‬5‫ן‬, ‘their infants’. In
,these cases the translator was hardly ignorant of the meaning of the Hebrew
and it seems likely that the translator felt free to modify the text also in 3,18.
The translation of ‫’ עש‬with φορολόγου, ‘tax-gatherer, tribute-collector
is interesting. ‫ עש‬clearly alludes to Exodus where the word is used in the
context of Egyptian task-masters urging the Israelites on to labour more
-intensively, and the OG employs a form of the word έπιστάτη?, ‘over
seer, supervisor’ or έργοδιώκτη?, ‘taskmaster’ (e.g. Exod 3,7; 5,6(.
φορολόγο? is, however, found only in Job 3,18; 39,7 and in Ezra
It may be a neologism (Lust 1996: 507a). If so, it would .5,5 ;4,7.18.23
suggest that the translator was thinking of his own time. It was not forced
labour so much as taxation that his audience found troublesome. This may
shed light on the use of αΙώνιοι for the Hebrew ‫אסירים‬, ‘-captives’. Prison
ers do not normally pay taxes. The victims of tax-collectors are ordinary
people. The αιώνιοι would refer to the ‘men of old’ who during their lives
.were subject to the exactions of the tax-collectors and now rest in peace

Job 3,19
‫קטן וגדול שם הוא‬
‫ועבד חפשי מאדניו‬
T ‫־־‬: ·· · S T V V S

,The small and the great are there

and the servant is free from his master,

Orientalia - 24
354 Robert Althann

μικρό? καί μέγας έκεΐ έστιν

.καί θεράπων δεδοικώ? τόν κύριον αΰτοΰ
,The small and the great are there
.and the servant that feared his lord

-In the first stich we notice the rather common figure of merismus: every
one is there from the lowest to the greatest (KraSovec 1977: 140). The
syllable count is 9:7, the word pattern 3:3. In the first part of the verse the
OG follows the MT exactly. In the second part the Hebrew ‫ח?שי מאדניו‬
appears as δεδοικώ? τόν κύριον αύτου, ‘fearing his master’. The idea of
liberation found in the Hebrew is not made explicit in the Greek, though
no doubt implied. Why did the translator make this change here? The
Greek in fact makes a smoother parallel with the first stich, while the MT
develops the thought with the idea of freedom for the slave. The OG may
simply have been unwilling to state in so many words that a slave would
-be free of his master even in the next life, bondage being a feature of soci
.ety in the translator’s day. It is the obedient servant that will enjoy rest

Job 3,24-25
‫כי־לפני לחמי אנחתי תבא‬
‫ויתכו כמים שאגתי‬
‫כי פחד פחז־תי ויאתיני‬
‫*יז‬7 ‫ואשר יגרתי' יבא‬
T · S T V ‫־ !־‬

For as my food sobbing comes upon me

.and my groans pour out like water
For when I fear something it comes upon me
.and what I dread befalls me

,προ γάρ των σίτων μου στεναγμός μοι ήκ6ι

δακρυω δè έγώ συνεχόμενος φόβψ‫־‬
,φόβο? γάρ, δν έφρόντισα, ήλθέν μοι
.καί δν έδεδοίκειν, συνήντησέν μοι
,For my groaning comes before my food
.and I weep being beset with terror
,For the terror on which I meditated has come upon me
.and that which I feared has befallen me

A question arises with regard to the first stich in the MT. It is objected
’that “‘before my bread”, i.e. before every meal, yields a poor sense
Driver 1921:11,21). The OG, however, suppports the text, as do Vulgate(,
 Job 3 in the Masoretic Text and the Septuagint 355

Syriac and Targum. Dhorme (1926: 37) points out that ‫ לפני‬can signify
like’ as in 4,19 and 1 Sam 1,16 (cf. BDB 817f.; Pope 1973: 33; Clines‘
.If the text is understood in this way, the poetic structure gains .)75 :1989
In the first two stichs of the MT there is parallelism now not only between
‫ אןחתי‬and ‫ שאגתי‬but also between ‫ ל^ני לחמי‬and ‫כמים‬, the sequence of words
:in the two stichs being chiastic: prepositional phrase + noun: verb: verb
-prepositional phrase + noun. In the next two stichs too there is full paral
lelism, ‫ פחד פחדתי‬being balanced by ‫ ואשר יגיר־תי‬and ‫ ו^ תעי‬by ‫;בא לי‬. The
syllable pattern is 10:11:12:9, the word count 5:3:4:4. The first half of the
verse describes Job’s grief, while the second gives the reason for it. In the
OG, on the other hand, the motive for Job’s anguish is already given in
v.24, whereas in the MT the second stich simply expands on the first. The
-translator is exercising freedom in relation to his Vorlage but by mention
ing ‘terror’ already in v.24 the progression towards the climax in v.25 is
-nullified. The translation πρό, ‘before’, as we have seen, yields less satis
factory sense and results in an inferior poetic structure, suggesting that the
.possibilities of the Hebrew text have been missed
The verses of Job 3 treated here show that while the MT presents the
-characteristics of Hebrew poetry including parallelism, chiasmus, meris
mus, the OG is prosaic. Furthermore, where the modem commentators
finds difficulties in the text, the ancient translator also seems to have been
at a loss, as in 3,5 where the last stich is simply omitted, or 3,14b where
-the text is changed. The translator exercised considerable freedom in rela
tion to the Hebrew Vorlage, so that verbal allusions to events in Israel’s
history could be weakened or even disappear in favour of relevance to the
present (3,18.19). The Vorlage does not appear to have been different
.from that represented in the MT ms

References
.Althann, R
,Job 3 after the Discussion between Mitchell Dahood and James Barr 1997
in: id., Studies in Northwest Semitic (Bíblica et Orientalia 45; Roma(
121-53.
.BDB Brown, F., S. R. Driver, and C. A. Briggs, eds
.A Hebrew and English Lexicon o f the Old Testament. Oxford 1907
.Clines, D. J
.Job 1-20. Word Biblical Commentary 17. Dallas 1989
.Cohen, C
The Meaning of 1996 ‫‘ צלמות‬:darkness’: A Study in Philological Method, in
M. V. Fox et al. (eds), Texts, Temples, and Traditions: A Tribute to
Menahem Haran (Winona Lake, Indiana( 287-309.
356 Robert Althann

Dhorme, P.
1926 Le livre de Job. 2nd ed. Etudes Bibliques. Paris.
Driver, S. R. and G. B. Gray.
1921 A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Book o f Job together
with a New Translation. Edinburgh.
Fernández Marcos, N.
1994 The Septuagint Reading of the Book of Job, in: W. Beuken (ed.), The
Book o f Job (Bibliotheca Ephemeridum Theologicarum Lovaniensium
114; Leuven) 251-66.
Fokkelman, J.
2000 Major Poems o f the Hebrew Bible: At the Interface o f Prosody and
Structural Analysis, 2: 85 psalms and Job 4-14. Studia Semítica
Neerlandica 41. Assen.
Freedman, D. N.
1977 Pottery, Poetry, and Prophecy: An Essay on Biblical Poetry. Journal o f
Biblical Literature 96, 5-26. Reprinted in: Pottery, Poetry, and
Prophecy: Studies in Early Hebrew Poetry (Winona Lake, Indiana
1980) 1-22.
Gentry, P. J.
1995 The Asterisked Materials in the Greek Job. Septuagint and Cognate
Studies 38. Atlanta.
1998a The Asterisked Materials in the Greek Job and the Question of the
καίγε Recension. Textus 19, 141-56.
1998b The Place of Theodotion-Job in the Textual History of the Septuagint,
in: A. Salvesen (ed.), Origen’s Hexapla and fragments (Texte und
Studien zum Antiken Judentum 58; Tübingen) 199-230.
GKC Gesenius, W., E. Kautzsch and A. Cowley, Gesenίus, Hebrew
Grammar. 2nd ed. Oxford 1910.
Gordis, R.
1978 The Book o f Job: Commentary, New Translation and Special Studies.
Moreshet 2. New York.
Gorea, M.
2007 Job repensé ou trahi?: Omissions et raccourcis de la Septante. Etudes
Bibliques 56. Paris.
Greenstein, E. L.
2003 The Language of Job and its Poetic Function. Journal o f Biblical
Literature 122, 651-66.
Ha, K.-T.
2005 Frage und Antwort: Studien zu Hiob 3 im Kontext des Hiob-Buches.
Herders Biblische Studien 46. Freiburg im Breisgau.
Habel, N. C.
1985 The Book o f Job. Old Testament Library. Philadelphia.
Horst, F.
1968 Hiob: 1. Teilband. Biblischer Kommentar Altes Testament XVI/1.
Neukirchen-Vluyn.
 Job 3 in the Masoretic Text and the Septuagint 357

Joüon, P. and T. Muraoka

2006 A Grammar o f Biblical Hebrew. 2nd ed. Subsidia Bíblica 27. Roma.
Krasovec, J.
1977 Der Merismus im Biblisch-Hebräischen und Nordwestsemitischen.
Bíblica et Orientalia 33. Rome.
Lust, J., E. Eynikel and K. Hauspie (eds.)
1992-96 A Greek-English Lexicon o f the Septuagint. Part I-II. Stuttgart.
Nilsson, M. P.
1955-56 Geschichte der griechischen Religion. 2nd ed. Handbuch der
Altertumswissenschaft 5. München.
Noegel, S. B.
2007 Job iii 5 in the Light of Mesopotamian Demons of Time. Vetus
Testamentum 57, 556-62.
Oesch, J. M.
2001 Ijob 3,3a: “Gezeugt” oder “geboren?”: Ein Beitrag zur Struktur von
Ijob 3. Protokolle Zur Bibel 10, 121-30.
Pope, M. H.
1973 Job: Introduction, Translation, and Notes. 3rd ed. Anchor Bible 15.
Garden City, New York.
Sama, N. M.
1996 Notes on the Use of the Definite Article in the Poetry of Job, in: M. V.
Fox et al., Texts, Temples, and Traditions: A Tribute to Menahem
Haran (Winona Lake, Indiana) 279-84.
Schleusner, J. F.
1829 Novus thesaurus philologico-criticus sive lexicon in LXX et reliquos
interpretes grecos ac scriptores apocryphos Veteris Testamenti. London.
Watson, W. G.
1986 Classical Hebrew Poetry: A Guide to its Techniques. 2nd ed. Journal
for the Study of the Old Testament, Supplement Series 26. Sheffield.
Ziegler, J. (ed.)
1982 lob. Septuaginta Vetus Testamentum Graecum 11,4. Göttingen.

Pontifical Biblical Institute

Copyright and Use:

As an ATLAS user, you may print, download, or send articles for individual use
according to fair use as defined by U.S. and international copyright law and as
otherwise authorized under your respective ATLAS subscriber agreement.

No content may be copied or emailed to multiple sites or publicly posted without the
copyright holder(sV express written permission. Any use, decompiling,
reproduction, or distribution of this journal in excess of fair use provisions may be a
violation of copyright law.

This journal is made available to you through the ATLAS collection with permission
from the copyright holder( s). The copyright holder for an entire issue of ajournai
typically is the journal owner, who also may own the copyright in each article. However,
for certain articles, the author of the article may maintain the copyright in the article.
Please contact the copyright holder(s) to request permission to use an article or specific
work for any use not covered by the fair use provisions of the copyright laws or covered
by your respective ATLAS subscriber agreement. For information regarding the
copyright holder(s), please refer to the copyright information in the journal, if available,
or contact ATLA to request contact information for the copyright holder(s).

About ATLAS:

The ATLA Serials (ATLAS®) collection contains electronic versions of previously

published religion and theology journals reproduced with permission. The ATLAS
collection is owned and managed by the American Theological Library Association
(ATLA) and received initial funding from Lilly Endowment Inc.

The design and final form of this electronic document is the property of the American
Theological Library Association.