And it is not worth much, since the writers of the NT were all Palestinian Jews using the Hebrew Scripture. So were the scribes and the Pharisees. They did not need a corrupted Greek translation as shown below.From what I’ve read, many scholars think the writers of the NT quoted from the LXX. Put that in the FWIW file.
Septuagint Errors and Question of its Inspiration
In 1886, Alfred Edersheim wrote The Life and Times of Jesus the Messiah. This was a highly scholarly work by a devout Christian gentleman.
He explained the background on the translation of the Hebrew Bible into Greek in what we know as the Septuagint Bible. He claims that all we reliably know about it origin is that it was commissioned under the reign of a particular Pharoah in Egypt around at least 247 BC. The contention that it was done by 6 translators for each of the 12 tribes, totaling 72, is contained in a spurious letter, Edersheim thus implying that is not reliable truth. (The Life and Times of Jesus, supra, at 25.)
Next, Edersheim explains that the Septuagint was not divided as the original Hebrew Bible. The Original Testament is divided into the law, prophets and writings. [Note: Jesus Himself held this to be authoritative] Instead, the Septuagint was divided into 3 different compartments called the historical, prophetical, and poetical.
Next, the Septuagint also had a loose view of inspiration because it even admitted the Apocrypha into this Greek Bible. Edersheim then begins to identify quality issues, pointing out that that "it differs in almost innumerable instances from our own," i.e. , the Hebrew Bible. (The Life and Times of Jesus, supra, at page 27.)
In terms of the quality of the translation, Edersheim explains that it is clear that the Septuagint "is inferior" and sides in favor of a "slavish and false literalism," while "there is great Liberty, if not license, in handling the original text." And Edersheim adds that "gross mistakes occur along with happy renderings of very difficult passages....." (The Life and Times of Jesus, supra, at page 27.) These are often "unsatisfactory."
At times there are adaptations to Greek philosophical ideas. For example "even Siegfried is obliged to admit that the rendering in Genesis 1:2 bears undeniable marks of Grecian philosophical views." (Life and Times of Jesus, supra, at page 28 note 1.)
Then Edersheim continues, saying that "difficulties - or what seems such - are removed by the most bold method, and by free handling of the text," and does so "often very unsatisfactorily." (Life and Times of Jesus, supra, at 28.)
Edersheim adds that the Septuagint translation became regarded as inspired by the Jews living in the Greek speaking world. Then Edersheim comments:
"Only that we must not regard their views of inspiration - except as applying to Moses, and even there only partially - is identical with ours. To their minds inspiration differed quantitatively, not qualitatively, from what the rapt soul might at any time experience, so the heathen Philosopher may ultimately be regarding as at times inspired." (Life and Times of Jesus, supra, at page 29.)
Finally, on the issue of accuracy, Edersheim says that despite this high early regard, "later voices in the synagogue declared this version to have been as great a calamity to Israel as the making of the golden calf." (Life and Times of Messiah, supra, page 30.)
Septuagint Errors and Question of is inspiration