The Septuagint

  • Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.

    You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Stefcui

New Member
Jan 29, 2012
223
13
0
111
The City
The Septuagint is the Old Testament translated into Greek. It was translated in the year 280 BC under the request of King Ptolemy to be included into the Library of Alexandria. The High Priest who organised the translation was Eleazar, the great great grandfather of Jesus (Mathew 1:15). The entire event was recorded by Egyptian historians, and it is available to read online (see below - The Book of Aristeas).

God allowed the Hebrew manuscripts to be translated into Greek for a simple reason: Greek became the universal language. The New Testament (with the exception of the Gospel of Matthew) was recorded entirely in Greek, not Hebrew. The New Testament writers, along with Jesus, quoted almost exclusively from the Septuagint when they were reading from the Old Testament. This is known by comparing the NT quotes with the OT manuscripts. Over 90% of the quotations come from the Septuagint.

The Septuagint was used entirely by the early church for the first 400 years. It changed only when the Emperors had commissioned the Catholic Church to be the only form of Christianity (See the Edict of Thessalonica – 380 AD). Jerome was commissioned to translate the Hebrew into Latin, which became the new orthodox bible. It is important to note that the early church rejected the Hebrew because the Pharisees had tampered with it. The details of this tampering are recorded by Justin Martyr (Dialogue with Trypho, Justin Martyr). Jerome was financed by the Pope, the Emperor, and the Jews to introduce the Hebrew manuscripts into the church. The translation is called the Latin Vulgate. Jerome was basically a spy on behalf of the enemy. Jerome confessed to Augustine that he believed that the Bible was not inspired. He believed that Peter, Paul and James had lied on several occasions (see the Letters of Jerome to Augustine). Jerome was banished from Rome for his drunkardness and being a public nuisance; but he was a great scholar.

Just as the Jehovah’s Witnesses have an inferior bible translation because they pervert the truth; so too the Church developed an inferior bible translation because the truth was perverted. The Septuagint was lost from the Western Church from that time on. In recent times, however, the Septuagint has come back into the Western Church. In the last 10 years there have been more Septuagint translations made then in the entire 2000 years prior.

A simple question arises: how is the Septuagint different to our Hebrew counterpart? Does the Septuagint hold keys to understand passages of the bible that have been sealed up until the time of the end? Did Jesus and the Apostles quote from the Septuagint so as to direct us to this knowledge? Can we simply disregard the Septuagint when Jesus and the Apostles endorsed it as being inspired? If we are not to trust or use the Septuagint, were Jesus and the Apostles wrong for recommending it for Christian use?

I want to explore these questions that began in a different post where Westcott and Hort were challenged. Below are some links to read more about this topic if you would like to become more acquainted with the subject.

An Introduction to the Old Testament in Greek (Henry Barclay Swete)
http://christianbookshelf.org/swete/an_introduction_to_the_old_testament_in_greek_additional_notes/index.html

The Epistle of Aristeas
http://www.ccel.org/...ig/aristeas.htm

The Septuagint Online
http://ecmarsh.com/lxx/

Please add any comments or questions. I will post some verses which show how the New Testament quoted from the Septuagint. This topic is largely unknown to the majority of Christians at this time; yet there is an explosion of knowledge coming available for all who would choose to see.

God Bless
Steve
 

jiggyfly

New Member
Nov 27, 2009
2,750
86
0
63
North Carolina
Steve, first off thanks for posting with small paragraphs, making it easy to read. I am very interested in the LXX and have saved the links you posted to my fav sites. I have been using the LXX for the majority of my studies, especially word studies, for a couple of years now. I find it to be extremely helpful in helping with defining the Greek words used in the NT by seeing how those same Greek words were used as translations for the Hebrew words in the OT. Looking forward to reading and learning more from this thread, thanks again for starting it. :)
 

Stefcui

New Member
Jan 29, 2012
223
13
0
111
The City
There are some excellent books available online for free at http://www.archive.org/. One particularly is by Thomas Brett, Why Bibles Differ from the Septuagint (1743). I have a formatted version of this into PDF if anyone would like a copy.

Another good article on the Alexandrian Septuagint is by Barry Setterfield, found here: http://www.setterfie...nt_History.html

The following is a list of differences between the Greek and Hebrew manuscripts. The NT vindicates that the Septuagint is the correct version in most cases. In the other references the context vindicates the LXX (Septuagint). This list is not comprehensive.
  • Genesis 2:1 - Christians know that God completed all His works on the 6[sup]th[/sup] day; and on the 7[sup]th[/sup] day God rested from all His works. This view is held in Christian tradition and in the Septuagint; yet it is not taught in the Masoretic Text at Genesis 2:1. The KJV reads: “And on the seventh day God ended his work which he had made.”
  • Genesis 46:27 - the number of souls who travelled with Joseph into Egypt is said to be 70 in the Masoretic; and 75 in the Septuagint. Acts 7:14 shows the Septuagint to be correct; and the Masoretic (KJV-NIV) has an error.
  • Genesis 7:11 - Noah’s flood began on the 17[sup]th[/sup] day in the Masoretic; yet the flood began on the 27[sup]th[/sup] day in the LXX. The flood lasted 1 year; and the date of the receding water is correct only in the Septuagint (Gen 8:14).
  • Genesis 11:12 – Cainan, the forefather of Christ, is missing in the Masoretic Text, along with the dates of his birth and death; but he is present in the Septuagint. Luke 3:36 testifies that the Septuagint alone is correct, and the dates and order of the Masoretic have errors.
  • Numbers 24:23 – Og is found in LXX in Balaam’s prophecy, but is missing from the MT
  • Judges 3:17 – Eglon is called “a very fat man” in the MT; or a “very polite man” in the LXX (Thomson’s).
  • 1 Samuel 9:22 – LXX has “seventy men” who were leaders; MT has “thirty men”. The LXX has the correct numbers, as the precedent of 70 elders was established in the time of Moses (Exodus 24:9; Numbers 11:16), and continued until New Testament times (Ezekiel 8:11; Luke 10:1). The Jewish Sanhedrin had 70 elders.
  • 1 Samuel 4:15-18 – Eli ruled for 20 years in the LXX, and died when he was 90 years old. The MT has Eli’s rule as 40 years, and dying when he was 98 years old.
  • 1 Samuel 18:25-27 – LXX has 100 Philistines; MT has 100 Philistines in verse 25, and then in verse 27 MT has 200.
  • 1 Samuel 23:13 – LXX has 400 men with David; whereas MT has 600 men. 22:2 shows LXX to be correct. Note: there were 600 men much later, which may have been the reason for the MT alteration (1 Samuel 25:13; 27:2; 30:9).
  • 2 Samuel 6:1 – David has 70,000 men assembled in the LXX; whereas the MT has 30,000 men assembled.
  • 2 Samuel 6:14 – David is “dancing with all his might” in the MT; whereas he is not dancing at all in the LXX. He is seen dancing by Saul’s daughter only in verse 16.
  • 2 Samuel 8:1-2 – LXX has halves, MT has thirds.
  • 2 Samuel 12:6 – LXX has seven times; MT has four times. David was following the law of “seven times” (Leviticus 26:18, 21, 24, 28).
  • Ezekiel 10:14 – The Masoretic has a complete verse that does not exist in the Septuagint, describing the four cherubs. The description in the Masoretic contradicts the vision Ezekiel previously gave of the four cherubs in Ezekiel 1:10, where the Ox is replaced by a Cherub. Ezekiel 10:20-22 confirms that these are the same creatures previously seen, with the same appearance, so the image has an error in the Masoretic.
  • Daniel 4:33 – Nebuchadnezzar received “hairs like a lion” in the LXX, whereas he received “feathers like an eagle” in the Masoretic Text.
  • Daniel 8:14 – MT has 2300; LXX has 2400.
  • Amos 7:1 – Here Gog is mentioned in the Septuagint, but he is not mentioned in the Masoretic. The description is again used by John in the Apocalypse of the locusts with a king over them, which Amos says is Gog. Here John is quoting only the Septuagint.
  • Zechariah 1:8 – Here the Four Horseman of the Apocalypse are pictured, but the Masoretic horseman are different in colour, and there are only 3 horseman (as in the NIV), whereas the Septuagint has the right number of horseman and the right colors, showing that John was quoting Zechariah from the Septuagint.
Although many scholars will claim that the LXX is inferior, or has errors, these opinions are based on rumors spread by the enemies scholars. The enemy scholars also state that the book of Daniel is fake, along with statements doubting the entire bible. By doing a careful study, and testing the information for yourself, you will no longer be repeating enemy slogans. The reward is much greater than the risk.

God Bless
Steve
 

HeRoseFromTheDead

Not So Advanced Member
Jan 6, 2012
1,727
62
48
One particularly is by Thomas Brett, Why Bibles Differ from the Septuagint (1743). I have a formatted version of this into PDF if anyone would like a copy.

Yes please.

Genesis 7:11 - Noah’s flood began on the 17[sup]th[/sup] day in the Masoretic; yet the flood began on the 27[sup]th[/sup] day in the LXX. The flood lasted 1 year; and the date of the receding water is correct only in the Septuagint (Gen 8:14).

I am tentativley leaning towards the MT version at the moment. This is my reasoning:

(1) In the MT, the ark rested on the third day of the 7-day festival of Tabernacles, which is the 7th festival (or appointed time) of YHWH. The number 7 always signifies rest from labor. This seems very significant.

(2) The MT states that the the ark rested in the 17th day (שבעה־עשר יום) of the month (Genesis 8:4). However, the LXX states that the ark rested on the 27th of the month. The Hebrew word for 17 is spelled שבעה־עשר; and the Hebrew word for 27 is spelled שבעה־עשרים. Notice that the only difference between the Hebrew spelling of 27 and the Hebrew spelling of 17th day is one letter, the letter vav (ו) that is the middle letter of the Hebrew word for day (יום). Also notice that the word day is missing in the LXX. So it appears that the translanslators of the LXX read 17th day as 27, and translated it as such.

Update: This is not a definitive explanation, of course, because Genesis 8:14 in the MT says the earth was dried on the 27th day, which would exceed the year period. However, the LXX has 27th, not 27th day. So perhaps an additional יום (day) was appended to the end of the Hebrew word for 17th day to result in 27th day?
 

Stefcui

New Member
Jan 29, 2012
223
13
0
111
The City
Hi HeRoseFromTheDead,

You may be right about the 17[sup]th[/sup] day; especially as there is a simple way in Greek to confuse the words, as you pointed out. Josephus also has the 17[sup]th[/sup] day (Antiquities 1.3.5); as does the Rabba Seder Olam. The Dead Sea Scrolls has the verse missing. I have not done an exhaustive search through the church father yet, but I will let you know if I find some additional information. I will send you a copy of Brent’s book later today. It is a very good book by a well-respected theologian of his day. It covers the history of the Septuagint in a clear and balanced methodology.

God Bless
Steve
 

Stefcui

New Member
Jan 29, 2012
223
13
0
111
The City
Can you direct me to an online copy of Seder Rabba Olam?

Hi ‘HeRoseFromTheDead’,

Please be careful with the information within the Seder Olam. It was a project began by the Pharisees to discredit the teachings of Christians. Rabbi Akiba spear-headed the project and he also taught Aquila (who was the ex-christian who re-wrote a version of the Septuagint with deliberate errors to sabotage the Christian message). Akiba was also responsible for the Jewish uprising known as the Bar Khoba Revolt, and the proclaiming of Simon Bar Khoba as the Jewish Messiah. He was the most hostile Pharisee and anti-christian.

The Seder Olam Rabba is a chronology of the world in opposition to the dates set forth in the Septuagint. The dates in the Masoretic and Seder where changed at this time for this reason: to contradict the Septuagint. Josephus used the Septuagint dates because the dates as set forth in the Masoretic did not exist in Josephus’s day; they were fabricated by Akiba early in the 2[sup]nd[/sup] century. Justin Martyr speaks about this event, as do others who were witnesses. All earlier historians and theologians, like Philo and Alexander Polyhistor, also use the dates of the Septuagint.

You will find most of the Seder Olam Rabba available from this address:
http://books.google.com.au/books/about/Ancient_Seder_Olam.html?id=zyr_51gDIjoC&redir_esc=y

Bar Khoba Revolt
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bar_Kokhba_revolt

Rabbi Akiba
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rabbi_Akiva

Aquila of Sinope
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aquila_of_Sinope

Seder Olam Rabbah
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seder_Olam_Rabbah

Justin Martyr – Dialogue with Trypho
http://christianbookshelf.org/justin/dialogue_of_justin_philosopher_and_martyr_with_trypho/index.html

God Bless
Steve
 

HeRoseFromTheDead

Not So Advanced Member
Jan 6, 2012
1,727
62
48
Another discrepancy between the MT and LXX is found in Zechariah 14:5. The Hebrew verb נסתם (nstm) is found three (3) times in this verse. Notice that the English transliteration of נסתם, i.e., “nstm”, has no vowels. This is because Hebrew is a consonantal (consonants-only) language in written form. In Zechariah's day vowels were preserved orally through pronunciation.

Depending upon how נסתם (nstm) is pronounced, it can mean “you shall flee” (root verb נוס, nvs, Strong’s H5127), or “it shall be closed up” (root verb סתם, stm, Strong’s H5640). Bibles based on the Masoretic Text rendering of Zechariah 14:5 have the first meaning,

And ye shall flee to the valley of the mountains; for the valley of the mountains shall reach unto Azal: yea, ye shall flee, like as ye fled from before the earthquake in the days of Uzziah king of Judah.
Zechariah 14:5, King James Version

and bibles based on the LXX rendering of this verse have the second meaning:

And the valley of my mountains shall be blocked up; and the valley of mountains shall be closed up even to Jasod [Yasŏl/Azal]. It shall be blocked up as it was in the days of the earthquake in the days of Ozias king of Juda. …
Zechariah 14:5, LXX, first English translation by Charles Thomson, Secretary to the first United States Congresss, published 1808

There is sufficient compelling evidence (historical, archaeological, theological, linguistic, geologic, cartographic, photographic) that the LXX rendition is correct, It's too much to present here, but anyone interested in studying this further can to do an Internet search using the search terms zechariah + yasul + azal to find what they need.

Any discussion regarding this is appropriate and welcome here.
 

HeRoseFromTheDead

Not So Advanced Member
Jan 6, 2012
1,727
62
48
2 Samuel 8:1-2 – LXX has halves, MT has thirds.

I vote for the MT simply because this version gave me a relevance to Zechariah 13:8. The Hebrew writers frequently reused scriptural ideas.

And it shall come to pass, [that] in all the land, saith the LORD, two parts therein shall be cut off [and] die; but the third shall be left therein. Zechariah 13:8

And he smote Moab, and measured them with a line, casting them down to the ground; even with two lines measured he to put to death, and with one full line to keep alive. And [so] the Moabites became David's servants, [and] brought gifts. 2 Samuel 8:2

2 Samuel 12:6 – LXX has seven times; MT has four times. David was following the law of “seven times” (Leviticus 26:18, 21, 24, 28).

I vote for the MT version. I think one has to consider the context. The rich man stole the poor man's lamb. The law required thefts of sheep to be restored fourfold to the victim.

If a man shall steal an ox, or a sheep, and kill it, or sell it; he shall restore five oxen for an ox, and four sheep for a sheep. Exodus 22:1
 

PropphecyStudent

New Member
Jan 6, 2012
139
0
0
Hi,

It's all well and good to have some expectation as to any veracity, either by opinion or preference, but much better to have objective evidence. And where this conversation might not have been possible ~50 year ago, the Dead Sea Scrolls have more recently provided the most ancient copies available for comparison:


Apologetics Press :: Reason & Revelation
April 1995 - 15[4]:25-30

The Dead Sea Scrolls and Biblical Integrity
by Garry K. Brantley, M.A., M.Div.

...
THE SCROLLS AND THE MASORETIC TEXT
...
Critical scholars questioned the accuracy of the MT, which formed the basis of our English versions of the Old Testament, since there was such a large chronological gap between it and the autographs. Because of this uncertainty, [?Septuagint?]scholars often “corrected” the text with considerable freedom.
...
A comparison of the MT to this earlier text revealed the remarkable accuracy with which scribes copied the sacred texts. Accordingly, the integrity of the Hebrew Bible was confirmed, which generally has heightened its respect among scholars and drastically reduced textual alteration.
...
CRITICAL SCHOLARSHIP, DANIEL, AND THE SCROLLS
...
Daniel was peculiarly safeguarded to the extent that we have at our disposal parts of all chapters of Daniel, except chapters 9 and 12.
...
INTEGRITY OF THE TEXT
...
Further, a comparison of the Septuagint translation (Greek translation of the Hebrew Bible) with the MT revealed tremendous disparity in length and content between the two texts. Due to these and other considerations, critical scholars assigned little value to the MT rendition of Daniel.

Once again, however, the findings at Qumran have confirmed the integrity of Daniel’s text. Gerhard Hasel listed several strands of evidence from the Daniel fragments found at Qumran that support the integrity of the MT (see 1992, 5[2]:50). First, for the most part, the Dead Sea Scroll manuscripts of Daniel are very consistent in content among themselves, containing very few variants. Second, the Qumran fragments conform very closely to the MT overall, with only a few rare variants in the former that side with the Septuagint version. Third, the transitions from Hebrew to Aramaic are preserved in the Qumran fragments. Based on such overwhelming data, it is evident that the MT is a well-preserved rendition of Daniel. In short, Qumran assures us that we can be reasonably confident that the Daniel text on which our English translations are based is one of integrity. Practically speaking, this means that we have at our disposal, through faithful translations of the original, the truth God revealed to Daniel centuries ago.
...

http://www.apologeti...rg/articles/266


Independent of these findings one could add significant dispute to the veracity of the Septuagint and corresponding confidence to the Masoritic Text, however I believe the Dead Sea Scroll comparison provides the greatest determining factor.
 

Stefcui

New Member
Jan 29, 2012
223
13
0
111
The City
The Dead Sea Scrolls confirm the Septuagint to a much greater extent than they do the Masoretic. Daniel is very selectively chosen, and it also is heavily debated among "the scholars". Anyone can select evidence by way of generalisations to confirm "orthodoxy". For example, the Jehovah's Witnesses are more orthodox than the Jews because they accept the New Testament (a sweeping generalisation); the Dead Sea Scrolls are closer to the Masoretic because they were written in Hebrew (a sweeping generalisation).

The translation behind the Septuagint has been found to be much closer to the Dead Sea Scrolls Hebrew then it is to the Masoretic Hebrew. The Masoretic Hebrew is much closer to the Samaritan translation.

You need to carefully study the material before you can make an accurate assessment. By quoting other people’s research does not mean you are any closer to the truth. All you are demonstrating is what level of proof was required for you to believe.

A very thorough study has been produced by Grant Jones: http://mysite.verizon.net/rgjones3/Septuagint/spindex.htm

Here you will find scriptures and graphs for you to test the comparison for yourself. Below is an example chart from Grant Jones where he shows the results of his research. Of course, parts of the verses will align to both the Hebrew and the Greek, but as you can see, most of the verses tip in favour of the Septuagint. The scriptures (or parts there of) that agree with the Hebrew are the parts of the evidence that Mosoretic supporters produced to support their views… the Septuagint scripture support is mostly ignored by Masoretic advocates.

God Bless
Steve
 

Attachments

  • ntchart1.gif
    ntchart1.gif
    13.7 KB · Views: 8
  • Like
Reactions: Angelina

Stefcui

New Member
Jan 29, 2012
223
13
0
111
The City
Hi ‘HeRoseFromTheDead’,

I have just emailed you the booklet by Thomas Brett. Just a quick comment on your previous post…

The list I placed up is not conclusive. I am in the middle of a research project which I have not finished yet. I have not gone over each and every verse with a fine tooth comb. I started to transliterate Thomson’s bible into easier English, and I made a few notes on my way which I intended to get back to for greater research. The examples I posted were part of my unfinished notes.

The big difference between my focus and Grant Jones’ research is that Grant goes over every single quotation in the New Testament and compares both the Masoretic and Septuagint. It really is an amazing work he has performed. I was not trying to duplicate what he had already done…

My focus is on how the Septuagint and Masoretic differ to each other in the basic reading of the text. I am particularly interested how these differences may alter the understanding of prophecy. The example you have shown in Zechariah 14:5 demonstrates that the meaning of a prophecy can be altered considerably, depending on whether you follow the Septuagint or the Masoretic.

My first study began many years ago… I did a three column bible comparison of the Masoretic, Septuagint and Dead Sea Scrolls. I completed this with a primary emphasis on the Minor Prophets. It was a way I could do short complete books of prophecy and see if there were any consistent differences. I did find differences which did alter the interpretation and meaning. Many of the names and geographical locations were different, giving a completely different understanding… (i.e., the prophecy’s on Tyre). I then did prophets such as Daniel and Jeremiah. Here again were some fairly large differences; particularly in Jeremiah. Septuagint Jeremiah is different in size to the Masoretic by about a third. The orders of the chapters are the same until you arrive at chapter 25. After that, the chapters, in either the Septuagint or Masoretic, have been shuffled like cards. My opinion is that the Septuagint has the original chapter order, and the Masoretic chapters have been shuffled.

I will place an image below of an example of the differences in chapter order in Jeremiah. (I have the same information designed into a bookmark image designed by my son when he was 16 . I will post it when i find it).

Another curiosity of the Septuagint and Masoretic distinctions is how the NT authors chose to quote from the OT. They quoted from the Septuagint mostly; but not entirely. I believe they are showing us an example of how to use the manuscripts. We should not use only one manuscript, as in the Septuagint only; we need to look carefully at the distinctions and allow the Holy Spirit to direct us into understanding. If you use only the Masoretic, you are not following the Apostles and Jesus’ example, and we will not get the complete picture that was intended.

An example of this is found in the use of the Tetragrammaton (Jehovah/Yahweh). The NT does not use the full YHWH designation. The NT follows the Septuagint and the Dead Sea Scrolls usage of the Divine Name. The YHWH designation is found in the Masoretic almost 7000 times; yet it is in the Dead Sea Scrolls and Septuagint merely a few times. It is likely that the Pharisees had inserted the Divine Name thousands of times in order to place greater emphasis onto the Father. They wanted to emphasis that the Father alone should be worshiped. From this the Jews and the Jehovah’s Witnesses take their doctrines. If we followed the examples of Jesus and the Apostles for manuscript authority, this error (and scriptural alterations) would be avoided. Many today are returning to these Jewish errors because they are not aware that the oldest manuscripts do not have the numerous insertions of the divine name. The only manuscripts that contain the numerous YHWH insertions were written 900 years after Christ!

There is much to learn from a close examination of the Septuagint. How dare we imply that Jesus was wrong when He used and recommended the Septuagint. We state that we know more than Him. There are many who will not budge from their traditions. They think they are right and they will go to their deaths proclaiming the superiority of the Masoretic Text. This mindset is the Pharisee in Christian form. We need to follow the example of Christ; but all too often the traditions of men supplant the Wisdom of God.

God Bless
Steve
 

Attachments

  • Jeremiah.jpg
    Jeremiah.jpg
    107.4 KB · Views: 5

Stefcui

New Member
Jan 29, 2012
223
13
0
111
The City
Hi ProphecyStudent,

The Dead Sea Scrolls have been research exhaustively elsewhere. I have heard your proposal before; but there is very little evidence to support it. The Hebrew used in the NT, where used, is not exclusively from the Masoretic. Some quotations are directly from the Dead Sea Scrolls, and other quotations come from sources not known today. The Masoretes had systematically destroyed manuscripts each time a new translation was made; that is why we only have Masoretic manuscripts dating from 900 years after Christ. The Pharisees also went on a campaign to have every available copy of the Septuagint destroyed. This was well documented.

The value of Grant Jones’ research is to focus on the actual NT quotations, and comparing them with the actual OT manuscripts. Grant has several pages which have every single quotation mentioned in tables. You need to navigate using his menu on the left-hand side of page. Grant demonstrates by percentage how much each of the quotations are in agreement with each different manuscript. The value of this is that you can check each quotation and reference in your own bible software program. There are hundreds of references, and the data is very surprising.

This is no trick. It is probably difficult for you to take in at first if you have not known about this previously. It is largely a church secret which only academics have been aware of. Many people who have invested interest in their doctrines or beliefs have attacked the Septuagint as being unreliable or corrupt. They do this because, if the Septuagint translation is to be preferred, many religious sacred cows get destroyed in the process. Their allegations are of course unfounded and in many cases ridiculous; but what is alleged is meant to cast doubt and scorn; and this often works for the majority.

If there is something specific you would like to understand, please don’t hesitate to probe this subject. Reading the bible Jesus read and quoted from is a deeply enriching experience.

God Bless
Steve
 

PropphecyStudent

New Member
Jan 6, 2012
139
0
0
Hi Steve,

Speaking strictly for the Old Testament I guess there are several levels at which this issue can be evaluated.

One is the premise that the original Hebrew was translated into Greek. Then the original was lost to history. Then the Greek was re-translated back in to Hebrew. Thus the oldest text is the Greek. As a student of study, I find this incredulous on many points both objective (i.e., Dead Sea Scrolls; societal conventions) and subjective (i.e., Gods chosen were unable to protect that intrusted to them).

So when evaluating objectively, one would expect to find a side by side by side comparison of the Dead Sea / Masoretic / Septuagint. This was performed in the link I cited. However, it was not performed in the link you cited. Secondly, one must consider whether there are agendas (hidden or otherwise) which would bias the perspective for or against a particular point of view. This did not appear to be evident in the link I provided, but was overt in the link you provided.

Steve, people read ~tanslations~ every day which do not reflect the original text, and I don't mind some of those imperfections. However, when they argue points based upon a faulty ~translation~ then I try to explain the original text. Unfortunately human nature, being what it is, most cannot receive the TRUTH of the original text. It's as though the well has already been poisoned.

Simply put, when I seek the original text I do not use an English or other ~translation~, I go directly to the Masoretic Text. And there I find what the Author originally wrote, as best available.


But where you ask if there is something specific I'd like to address, please allow me to ask you how much a $100 speeding ticket might cost. (Yes, this is a "trick" question. :) )


May God Richly Bless You Too!
ProphecyStudent
 

Stefcui

New Member
Jan 29, 2012
223
13
0
111
The City
Hi ProphecyStudent,

This post may not be for you. I appreciate that you may have studied certain subjects which make you feel learned; but you are not responding with anything, or asking anything, that contributes to the discussion. You appear to be the self-appointed Devil's Advocate, here and elsewhere... (i.e., Is This A "Christian" or Is This A "Religious" Forum?)

I do not want to involve myself in meaningless circular debates that go round and round just for the sake of it. I do not want to answer you at all if you respond as a scoffer. I am sorry I was not able to give satisfactory answers to you.

Regards
Steve
 
  • Like
Reactions: jiggyfly

jiggyfly

New Member
Nov 27, 2009
2,750
86
0
63
North Carolina
Hi ProphecyStudent,

This post may not be for you. I appreciate that you may have studied certain subjects which make you feel learned; but you are not responding with anything, or asking anything, that contributes to the discussion. You appear to be the self-appointed Devil's Advocate, here and elsewhere... (i.e., Is This A "Christian" or Is This A "Religious" Forum?)

I do not want to involve myself in meaningless circular debates that go round and round just for the sake of it. I do not want to answer you at all if you respond as a scoffer. I am sorry I was not able to give satisfactory answers to you.

Regards
Steve
Very good response Steve, thanks for keeping it friendly. :)
 

PropphecyStudent

New Member
Jan 6, 2012
139
0
0
Hi ProphecyStudent,
...
I do not want to involve myself in meaningless circular debates that go round and round just for the sake of it. I do not want to answer you at all if you respond as a scoffer. I am sorry I was not able to give satisfactory answers to you.

Regards
Steve

Hi Steve,

I apologize if I appear to be a scoffer, for that certainly is not my intent. I'm simply performing the same analysis from what I believe to be an objective perspective. As such when I answered your offer by asking how much a $100 speeding ticket costs, the obvious response is $100. So what is my point?

Daniel 9:25

The Masoretic Text cites seven shibiym to the coming of an anointed one. Then it cites sixty-two for building squares and moat. Then after the sixty-two an anointed on is cut of. (This presents TWO anointed ones.)

The Septuagint cites seven and sixty-two to the coming of an anointed one. (This presents ONE anointed one.)


Newton observed that there is no society which sums numbers such as the ~seven and sixty-two~ to arrive to a value the presumed intended ~sixty-nine~. He concludes that if God had intended ~sixty-nine~ that He would have simply said ~sixty-nine~, and a "seven and sixty-two" translation does "violence" to Scripture.


So if the Septuagint is the better text, then one would presume that the Septuagint conformed to societal conventions, and the Masoretic text defied societal conventions. However, there is NO precedent in either Scripture or world history which substantiates the Septuagint version, but virtually every evidence of a Masoretic precedent. Furthermore, there is NO possible Daniel 9 historical fulfillment for the Septuagint text, but a perfect historical fulfillment for the Masoretic text.


But you asked if I had something specific in mind, and this is my response.


With Regards,
PropphecyStudent
 

HeRoseFromTheDead

Not So Advanced Member
Jan 6, 2012
1,727
62
48
However, there is NO precedent in either Scripture or world history which substantiates the Septuagint version, but virtually every evidence of a Masoretic precedent.

That's a ridiculous statement. Neither the MT nor the LXX is 100% accurate. The apostles themselves witness that the LXX is correct many times. The LXX has the correct rendering of Zechariah 14:5; whereas the MT has a fairy tale. What evidence do you have that the MT version of this verse i correct. The DDS have no voice in this particular matter.
 

PropphecyStudent

New Member
Jan 6, 2012
139
0
0
That's a ridiculous statement. Neither the MT nor the LXX is 100% accurate. The apostles themselves witness that the LXX is correct many times. The LXX has the correct rendering of Zechariah 14:5; whereas the MT has a fairy tale. What evidence do you have that the MT version of this verse i correct. The DDS have no voice in this particular matter.

Hi HeRose...,

The context was in regards to Daniel 9:25 being presented as "seven and sixty-two" by the Septuagint. If you have a precedent you would like to cite, either in Scripture or any society in the history of the world, then it will be received.


PropphecyStudent