Does ἐπίκλητος modify ἁγία? If so, why is ἐπίκλητος masculine if ἁγία is feminine?
For instance in Numbers 29:1.
Καὶ τω μηνὶ τω ἑβδόμω μια τοῦ μηνὸς ἐπίκλητος ἁγία ἔσται ὑμῖν πᾶν ἔργον λατρευτὸν οὐ ποιήσετε ἡμέρα σημασίας ἔσται ὑμῖν
It’s not masculine but feminine and indeed modifies ἁγία. Adjectives formed with two words generally (always?) have only a single ending for masculine and feminine.
All of those finite verbs together in the Numbers passage are a little jarring to me. I assume that’s influence from the Hebrew?
Numbers 29:1: ΚΑΙ τῷ μηνὶ τῷ ἑβδόμῳ, μιᾷ τοῦ μηνός, ἐπίκλητος ἁγία ἔσται ὑμῖν, πᾶν ἔργον λατρευτὸν οὐ ποιήσετε· ἡμέρα σημασίας ἔσται ὑμῖν.
Hi, Joel.
Sure, I guess. I suppose that’s one way to look at it.
Without getting into the metalanguage, the Hebrew could have been rendered:
But if the LXX was good enough for Moses, it’s good enough for me. 
p.s. A question that might interest some is whether we should supply ἡμέρα or ἐκκλησία or some such feminine noun with the phrase ἐπίκλητος ἁγία.
p.p.s. A question that might interest Isaac is whether we should accent it ἐπίκλητος, ἅγια, and take ἐπίκλητος as masculine, referring to Jesus, and ἅγια as neuter plural, in apposition to Jesus, referring to the πρόσωπα τοῦ Θεοῦ τρία. 
sry if this is out of topic, but if so strong is the hebraism that reside in LXX, would knowledge of hebrew is more unlocking to the text or ancient greek in general or both?
Either, or better neither. God leaves the place unlocked.
Hi Markos, I want to understand your question,
“p.s. A question that might interest some is whether we should supply ἡμέρα or ἐκκλησία or some such feminine noun with the phrase ἐπίκλητος ἁγία.”
What “ἐπίκλητος ἁγία” is translating is
מקרא קדש
which has no (extra) “day” or “gathering” in it. Moreover, both
מקרא
and
קדש
are nouns.
(Sorry about all the line breaks but Android hasn’t quite mastered bidirectional writing yet.)
(One more reply to Markos)
“Without getting into the metalanguage, the Hebrew could have been rendered…”
For those of us interested mostly in comparing the Masoretic text against an earlier Hebrew text (that’s now lost except for its indirect preservation in the LXX), it’s hugely useful that the Greek is an almost word-for-word translation from Hebrew. Makes it a lot easier to flag where the two Hebrew texts were at variance.
So, sorry about the awkward Greek! And if you ask me, an “idiomatic” Greek translation of the Tanakh should be in the Epic dialect anyway. (Serious question: has anyone ever tried doing that?)
