The Septuagint

[PropphecyStudent]

...
Answer me this and I will credit you with knowledge.
...

Hi Steve,

I'm not sure why we are moving onto new points. Thus far I've simply asked why the Septuagint presents the seven and the sixty-two as one number, for which Newton observed does "violence" to Scripture, which I agree with. You responded that this aspect does "not really exist", and that some Newton and I are "reading too much into it".

In another post you insisted: "In the Masoretic it has the word "anointed"; in the Septuagint is has the word "Christ". These two terms mean exactly the same thing", which any Concordance easily disputes. I cited for the text mashiyach (H4899) used 39 times, 37 times of which are NOT capitalized, and ARE capitalized 2 times for Daniel 9 which is errant, as these citations are not prophetic for Jesus and have absolutely nothing to do with him.


As it now stands, neither you nor HeRoseFromTheDead have answered either aspect, instead you both have assailed me personally. And I'm quite certain that's exactly how Jesus would have handled a Scripturally based discussion.





For the greater audience, please allow me to bracket this Topic:

1. The oldest copy of a Masoretic Text dates to ~900 A.D.

2. The oldest copy of a Septuagint Text dates to ~400 A.D.

3. The Dead Sea Scrolls (Masoretic Text) dates from ~150 B.C. to ~70 A.D.

4. The Septuagint was translated from the Masoretic Text to Greek, the common language for many people at the time of Christ.

5. It has apparently been proposed by Septuagint proponents in this Forum (and in other venues) that the Masoretic Text has been changed over the centuries, and is no longer a reliable text.

6. Please note, the King James Version used the Masoretic Text.

7. Scholars provide the following analysis of the Book of Daniel from the Dead Sea Scroll collection with respect to the Masoretic & Septuagint Texts:


http://www.apologeticspress.org/apcontent.aspx?category=13&article=357

Apologitics Press - The Dead Sea Scrolls

...
The Dead Sea Scrolls have lifted their voice in this controversy. Due to the amount of Daniel fragments found in various caves near Qumran, it appears that this prophetic book was one of the most treasured by that community. Perhaps the popularity of Daniel was due to the fact that the people of Qumran lived during the anxious period in which many of these prophecies actually were being fulfilled. For whatever reason, 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

As in the case of Isaiah, before Qumran there were no extant manuscripts of Daniel that dated earlier than the late tenth century [size="-1"]A.D.[/size] Accordingly, scholars cast suspicion on the integrity of Daniel’s text. Also, as with Isaiah, this skepticism about the credibility of Daniel’s contents prompted scholars to take great freedom in adjusting the Hebrew text. One reason for this suspicion is the seemingly arbitrary appearance of Aramaic sections within the book. Some scholars had assumed from this linguistic shift that Daniel was written initially in Aramaic, and then some portions were translated into Hebrew. Further, a comparison of the Septuagint translation (Greek translation of the Hebrew Bible) with the [size="-1"]MT[/size] revealed tremendous disparity in length and content between the two texts. Due to these and other considerations, critical scholars assigned little value to the [size="-1"]MT[/size] 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 [size="-1"]MT[/size] (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 [size="-1"]MT[/size] 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 [size="-1"]MT[/size] 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.


Conclusion:

It's certainly reasonable that translations are made from the original Hebrew text to Greek, Latin, Engiish, or any language. However, it is not reasonable that any translation should be elevated above the original manuscript. And as evidenced by the Dead Sea Scrolls, (the oldest available manuscript), the Masoretic Text appears to be "one of integrity". And so it appears that God's Word is preserved in this Masoretic Text.



PropphecyStudent

 

[HeRoseFromTheDead]

PropphecyStudent,

You are certainly a most-excellent troll and thread spammer.

 

[PropphecyStudent]

And you have no answer for Scripture!

 

[Stefcui]

...you both have assailed me personally.

You are selectively looking for evidence to support your wayward theology. You suggest we assail you simply because we expose your weak and illogical arguments. You are becoming a martyr in your own eyes; creating a self-fulfilling prophecy. You say ridiculous things and then claim to be persecuted, just like Jesus, because you are stating ridiculous things.

By the way, the Septuagint was NOT translated from the Masoretic; the Septuagint text is extent in the 2[sup]nd[/sup] century BC (the complete LXX bible exists in the 4[sup]th[/sup] century AD); the Dead Sea Scrolls date from much further back than 150 BC; the Masoretic WAS changed over the centuries (for instance, Rabbi Akiva took the word "virgin" out of Isaiah 7:14 in the 2[sup]nd[/sup] century AD, and replaced it with “women”, so as to deny the virgin birth, which was documented by Justin Martyr).

As I said, you claim to have knowledge about things when you simply do not. You claim to be persecuted when brothers try to correct you. You misunderstand basic Greek grammar and translation rules; yet speak as though you are an expert. You highlight one particular passage because it is the only prop you have to support your wayward theology. There are way too many things to point out thoroughly how wrong your appraisals are. Sorry, but you have not demonstrated a teachable spirit for me to waste my time on you.

I am not going to answer you any more unless you first answer the question I have given you concerning Luke 3:36... "A "law" is no longer a "law" if it fails in a single point..."

Steve

 

[PropphecyStudent]

... You claim to be persecuted when brothers try to correct you. ...

... very confused
... an unbeliever who scoffs
... Your knowledge won’t save you
... devilish mannerisms
... Leave prophecy to those who have advanced more
... You do a dis-service to the entire church
... You cannot jump straight from nursery to prophet
... Leave it alone.

... the trolls

... errors in your logic; in your beliefs; in your evidence; and most importantly, in your heart.
... undeveloped in their spiritual walk
... faulty logic
... this must be corrected by obedience to God in other areas.
... puffed up with pride
... painting the outside of your tomb
... straining the gnat while gulping the camel
... read the bible with a servant’s heart
... learn obedience and respect before you start pulling words apart
... assuming you have “true knowledge”
... leave it alone

...smug attitude

... troll and thread spammer

I want to thank you for the fine example you set of Christ Himself in your ~Christian~ charity and love. And as you ~teach~ your doctrines, you should consider expanding your vocabulary, typcial of "deficient", "moron", "imbecile", and "idiot".

These are legitimate medical terms which are quite helpful in character assassination assessment so that you can more effectively "correct" those who present evidence which disagree with your religious doctrines.




.

 

[Stefcui]

PropphecyStudent,

You are here simply to entrap people. The terms I use to describe you are accurate; I call a thing as I see it. I am not going to be made to feel guilty when you are asking for correction. I guess Jesus was guilty of assailing when he exposed the Pharisees. From what I have seen, you may be an unbeliever pretending to be a Christian. You have shown me nothing to believe otherwise.

"These are spots in your feasts of charity, when they feast with you, feeding themselves without fear: clouds they are without water, carried about of winds; trees whose fruit wither, without fruit, twice dead, plucked up by the roots; Raging waves of the sea, foaming out their own shame; wandering stars, to whom is reserved the blackness of darkness for ever." (Jude 1:12)

Steve

 

[Stefcui]

The Ignore Preferences under My Settings is a wonderful feature. Then there's no temptation to feed the trolls.

Let's hope this works. I didn't know it was there...

Thanks
Steve

Note: 'It works, that's really nice!'

 

[jiggyfly]

Steve I for one am ready for you to continue, I have enjoyed reading HeRoseFromTheDead and your posts.

 

[Stefcui]

Steve I for one am ready for you to continue...

Hi Jiggyfly, Your presence and character is a bonus to any post, thank you. It’s my skydiving day today, so I will continue with information if I come back. I have been booked in, but the weather has been bad each time.

I want to give some examples in more detail on how much the Septuagint was used by the earliest writers; form Polyhistor to Josephus to Justin Martyr. Constantine also ordered 50 copies to be produced for the new churches at Constantinople.

Are there any specific details you would like to see covered in more detail? It is a very broad subject.

God Bless
Steve

 

[jiggyfly]

A summary of the early church/historical writers that believed in Septuagint's credibility and accuracy would be great. Hope you have a good jump.

 

[Stefcui]

A summary of the Septuagint’s Christian history

The use of the Septuagint among the first Christians is universally accepted. It is difficult to find a single quote that is not from the Septuagint. In the 2[sup]nd[/sup] century AD there were discussions particularly about the nature of the Septuagint, because in the 2[sup]nd[/sup] century AD the Septuagint was challenged by the Jews for its usage by Christians. The Pharisees then also banned the Septuagint in the Synagogues for claiming that it had become a “Christian” text.

All Christians use and quote from the Septuagint in the 2nd and 3rd century AD. In the 3[sup]rd[/sup] century there is very little written about the Septuagint, but the greatest work had been done at this time by Origen to correct the errors which had been produced by Aquila, Theodotion and Symmachus in the previous century.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aquila_of_Sinope

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theodotion

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Symmachus_the_Ebionite

The three translators mentioned above were part of a planned assault against the infant church to corrupt the text of the Septuagint, so that new Christians who received a copy of the faulty manuscripts would be swayed into Gnostic or Jewish sects. This process has not changed today from the tactics of JW’s, SDA’s, LDS’s or British-Israelites. This tactic has never changed. In each generation there has been new and fresh attempts to destroy the orthodoxy of the Christian message.

Origen was perhaps the greatest of all church fathers. He has been assailed more than any father because he was a giant in the faith, and Satan has sought to have his name erased. Origen exposed the plans and machinations of the Devil. He wrote an 8 column bible which showed all of the above Septuagint translations alongside the orthodox Septuagint and different versions of the Hebrew that existed at that time. By doing this he exposed their lies and methods they used to corrupt the church. Origen was successful for 150 years, until the Devil swayed a new pawn… Jerome. Jerome was the equivalent of Judas Iscariot, except he did not hang himself. Jerome attacked Origen severely, and promoted the idea that Origen was a heretic. All along Jerome was introducing his new bible into the church, which became the standard bible for over 1000 years. This was the Latin Vulgate.

There were many heretical teachings that came into the church, and the flood gates of the devil were now opened against us. From the year 405 AD the Septuagint became rejected in favour of the Latin Vulgate. The Eastern Churches, which continued to speak Greek, rejected the Latin Vulgate, and they continued to use the Septuagint without stop (and still do).

In my next post I will give examples from the 2[sup]nd[/sup] century of how the assault against the Septuagint had begun, and how the very first Christians had viewed the translation of the Septuagint as being inspired of God. The change had ONLY occurred after 400 AD when the ROMAN Catholic Church had become institutionalised by the authority of Emperor Theodosius (See the Edict of Thessalonica). From this time Christianity had become a state religion. The state (Roman Empire) was dictating to the church what our beliefs and practices were. This was the first institutional religion of the Church, and in my opinion, it is what constituted the beginning of the Seven Churches of Asia Minor (Rev 1:4). All other churches since this time have been institutional state authorised religions. This was prophesied by Christ, and it will exist until the ministry of the two witnesses begins.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edict_of_Thessalonica

The restoration of the Septuagint accompanies the restoration of the church itself. This was part of the inference behind the message “seal the book until the time of the end.” (Daniel 12:4)

In the next section I will deal with the writings of Justin Martyr, Melito, Ariston, Athenagorus, Caius and Julius Africanus.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Justin_Martyr

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Melito

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aristo_of_Pella

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caius_(presbyter)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sextus_Julius_Africanus

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Athenagoras_of_Athens

It is not enough to simply know who these earliest Christians were; but to also know what their mind was through personal acquaintance with their writings. Many “academics” quote these authors completely out of context. There are many liars. This misinformation is then promoted among sects and cults to bring divisions into the church.

Later I will post about the earliest heretics who set out to destroy Christianity deliberately by writing false letter from the Apostles and others. This assault was spearheaded by Simon Magus and his followers.

God Bless
Steve

 

[jiggyfly]

It is not enough to simply know who these earliest Christians were; but to also know what their mind was through personal acquaintance with their writings. Many “academics” quote these authors completely out of context. There are many liars. This misinformation is then promoted among sects and cults to bring divisions into the church.


Steve

Good point Steve, I agree, much in the same way we must read/study the scriptures.

It may take me a while to read all of the links you posted so far but please continue on and I will catch up.

 

[PropphecyStudent]

I hope all will pardon me for interjecting, but I'm confused.


1. The Dead Sea (Qumran Cave) Scrolls (Masoretic Text) date from ~150 B.C. to ~70 A.D.

2. The Septuagint was written in 285 - 247 B.C., for which the oldest manuscript is ~400 A.D.

3. Scholars have evaluated the most comprehensive Qumran text, -- the Book of Daniel, for which multiple copies are available and is the most complete --, as a STANDARD being the oldest ORIGINAL COPY manuscript.

4. Scholars have attested that the Qumran Scrolls (specifically the Book of Daniel, and also portions of Isaiah) are nearly identical to the modern Masoretic Text, but are significantly different than the Septuagint.



Because the Septuagint was copied from the Masoretic Text in ~250 B.C., Septuagint proponents must presume that during the ~2,200 years since the Masoretic text was used as a basis for a Greek translation, that the Masoretic could ONLY have been corrupted during the first ~100 years, -- between ~250 B.C. when it was translated into Greek. versus the ~150 B.C. Qumran Scrolls. And it COULD NOT have been corrupted during the subsequent ~2,100 span of history due to the near identical match of the Qumram and the Modern Masoretic Text, per: "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".


As such it would seem that certainly the Book of Daniel and portions of Isaiah have veracity, -- unless some Jewish Scribes when bonkers during the ~100 years between ~250 and ~150 B.C. But simple logic would suggest that no religious Jew would accept such significant text revisions (tremendous disparity in length and content) in such a short time span (100 years). So it would appear that any textual liberties were probably taken either at inception or over the span of history with the Septuagint versus the Masoretic.



However, the Septuagint proponents haven't acknowledged either the authenticity of the Qumram Scrolls, their dating, an historical time line, historical scenario probability, explanation as to how these texts have arrived at such tremendous disparity, or how God's chosen is unable to protect and preserve His Word over the centuries:

Romans 14;4
... Yea, he shall be held up: for God is able to make him stand.




I would hope each of these aspects are addressed as this Topic proceeds.

PropphecyStudent

 

[Stefcui]

A note of caution pertaining to misinformation:

There is misinformation and lies circulated about the Septuagint; mostly by Jewish and atheistic scholars’ who have contempt of Christianity. These lies are then picked and carried by sectarian minded Christians who do not have any discernment or integrity for research. They become attached to their beliefs pyschologically (often demonically), not spiritually. Some of these lies are:

The Masoretic is older than the Septuagint
The Masoretic is not older than the LXX, and a pure Masoretic text older than 900 AD has not been found. This magician trick is used to make the Masoretic appear to be older than what it really is. Where is the evidence of this ridiculous statement? There is none!

The Septuagint was translated from the Masoretic
The Septuagint was not translated from the Masoretic. Where is the evidence of this ridiculous statement? There is none! This lie is told because certain singular verses have been discovered which are identical in both texts. This only proves that the LXX and Masoretic were both translated from a common parent. The Dead Sea Scrolls also come from this same parent.

The Dead Sea Scrolls prove the Masoretic is accurate
This is a huge lie that has been circulating to promote the idea that the bible has not been altered in any way. Where is the evidence of this ridiculous statement? There is none! The DSS are in fact closer to the Septuagint. The majority of the scholars involved with the DSS are Jewish, and of course, for them the DSS “prove” that the Masoretic is authentic. These scholars tell bold faced lies that are then circulated through the churches by self-appointed experts on orthodoxy. These same scholars also say that the Book of Daniel was not written by Daniel, but it was written by a scribe at about 150 BC. Daniel is not the oldest book found; this is a lie. Isaiah is the oldest manuscript found. The divine name is not found in the LXX or DSS (other than a dozen times). The Divine Name has been inserted into the Masoretic almost 7000 times in contradiction to the DSS, the LXX, the ST and the NT. This is evidence that the Masoretic has been altered dramatically. No other MSS follow the Masoretic.

ProphecyStudent, You are not adding any research to this post that is supported by facts; you are merely making broad statements that are unfounded. I would prefer you did not spread your unsupported lies on this post. If you want to believe these ridiculous assertions, that is your problem; this is evidence of your lack of research and blind support of your pet beliefs. Please do not make others fall into the same pit with you.

Good point Steve, I agree, much in the same way we must read/study the scriptures.

It may take me a while to read all of the links you posted so far but please continue on and I will catch up.

Thanks Jiggyfly. If the scriptures are twisted around, then other information too will be twisted around. There is no honesty for the dishonest.

God Bless
Steve

 

[Stefcui]

Early History of the Masoretic Text

The Septuagint was translated from the “master-copy” of the Hebrew that was kept within the Temple (Gordis, The Biblical Text in the Making, xxvi):

“Take the book of this law, and ye shall put it in the side of the ark of the covenant of the Lord your God; and it shall be there among you for a testimony.” (NETS Duet 31:26)

The manuscript that was kept beside the Ark of the Covenant in the Temple was the Temple Scroll. This Temple Scroll was captured and taken to Rome in 70 AD as a trophy for Emperor Titus. It was returned to the Roman Jews in 230 AD by Emperor Severus. Today it is known as the Severus Scroll. During the time that the Temple was being destroyed, the Jewish leaders were led by Rabbi Johanan ben Zakkai. The Pharisees had moved their seat of authority from Jerusalem to Jamnia (see Chapters on Jewish Literature, by Israel Abrahams 1899, page 19-20). Jamnia was a city located on the coast occupied by Vespasian’s administration while he advanced his army onto Jerusalem. Johanan ben Zakai had successfully negotiated with Vespasian for the protection of the Jewish leaders, so the Jewish leaders had moved to Jamnia where they would be safe. From 70 – 100 AD, Jewish affairs were dominated by Johanan ben Zakai from “the vineyard of Jamnia”. After this time, the Jewish seat of authority moved away from Jamnia, and was for a period of time located in Tiberius, where Johanan ben Zakai was buried.

From Tiberius, between the years 100 and 135 AD, Jewish leadership came under the control of Rabbi Akiva. From Tiberius the greatest reforms of the bible and Jewish teachings had taken place through scribes under the leadership of Akiva, and these scribes became known as the Tiberian Masoretes. The Tiberian Masoretes produced the Seder Olam Rabba, a Chronology of the World; they produced an alternative Septuagint recension through Aquila and Theodotion, and they produced a new revised OT Bible in Hebrew that was divergent from the existing Septuagint. This new scroll became the authority of Akiva’s leadership in which to judge all other manuscripts and beliefs. Paul Anthony de Lagarde, a researcher on the Septuagint and Masoretic origins writes:

“All the Biblical manuscripts that reached us were copies of a single authoritative archetype or “Mastercodex”, which dated “in the period of Rabbi Akiba, approximately 130 CE.”
(John Van Seters, The Edited Bible, The Curious History…, p 61)

This new “master-codex” replaced the Temple Scroll, and it was now used by the Pharisees to discredit and condemn the Septuagint. The very same Pharisees mentioned in the gospels whom Jesus called “offspring of vipers” (Mat 3:7, 12:34, 23:33) became the new editors of our Hebrew OT. These scribes became known as the Masoretes. The Masoretic Text was commenced by the renowned Pharisee, Rabbi Akiba; and it is his text that is now found in 99% of all Christian Bibles. This is a historical fact.

About the year 120 AD, Aquila, who infiltrated the Church so as to spy out our freedom, became a Pharisee. Aquila became the disciple of Rabbi Akiva. Akiva’s agenda was to spy out weaknesses in the beliefs of Christians. He studied Christianity so as to oppose it. He studied how the Septuagint bible was being used to draw Jews into Christianity. Rabbi Akiba appointed Aquila to write a “revision” of the Septuagint that would contradict the existing version of the LXX. At the same time the Masoretes were revising a Hebrew version that would also contradicted the Septuagint. This was intended to prove that the Septuagint of the Christians had errors. By doing this, Akiva believed that he could alter the tide of Jews converting to Christianity. Historian Will Durant writes: “Akiba’s methods were as absurd as his conclusions were sound; he derived liberal principles from a weird exegesis in which every letter of the Torah, or written law, was held to have a mysterious meaning.” (Will Durant, The Story of Civilization: Caesar and Christ, p. 547).

Aquila, the heretic, radically revised his “new Septuagint”: he added text that amounted to whole chapters and verses in many books; he changed prophecy’s pointing to Jesus; prophecy’s about the future of Israel; and he altered the genealogies and chronologies in Genesis 5 & 11. His new chronology mirrored the Pharisee alterations that are found in the book Sedar Olam Rabba (The Great Chronicle of the World).

God knew that Christians would one day be confused about which version and chronology to trust; so the Holy Spirit directed Luke in his gospel to settle the matter as simple as possible. The Pharisee bible, the Masoretic Text, has taken out a name in the genealogy of Genesis 11:12 which changes the genealogy leading to Christ, and the chronology of dates leading back to Adam. Luke, under inspiration, highlights the error in the Jewish text (Luke 3:36; Gen 11:12). It can be easily proven that the Jews changed the dates by comparing the Masoretic Text chronology with earlier chronologies written before that time, such as Josephus, Demetrius and Eupolemus. This one verse by Luke should be enough for Christians to accept and validate the Septuagint – otherwise Luke and the New Testament is wrong. The genealogy and chronology is correct only in one – either the Septuagint or the Masoretic - and Luke, under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, validates only the Septuagint. If the Masoretic is correct, then Luke is wrong. If Luke is wrong, then how can we trust any dates or statements made in the bible?

The chronologies of the Masoretic, along with the chronology of the Sedar Olam Rabba, and Aquila’s Greek, are all revisions made by the Pharisees. Rev William Hales states that the Masoretic chronology was “first fabricated by the Jews about the time of the publication of the Seder Olam Rabba, their great system of Chronology, in A.D. 130.” (Rev William Hales, A New Analysis of Chronology and Geography, History and Prophecy, Vol 1, page vi.) The Seder began to be compiled after the Temple was destroyed in 70 AD, and it was completed in stages up until 170 AD. Ken Johnson writes: “Studying the Seder will show what the ancient Rabbi’s taught and how apostasy set in when the nation of Israel rejected their Messiah.” Rabbi Akiba and Aquila, both of whom were Pharisees, used the dates in the Sedar to fabricate the chronology of the MT.

This process of establishing an authorised Hebrew version was repeated several times over the next hundreds of years. The school of Tiberian Masoretes established by Akiva were also later responsible for producing the Talmud and the Kabala. The difficulties in establishing an authorised text among the growing number of circulated copies was a most strenuous task. The Muslims, hundreds of years later, found themselves in this same quandary. Robert Gordis comments that “one highly accurate copy of the Koran was adopted as the textus receptus and only lithographic copies of this manuscript were permitted in the mosques.” (Robert Gordis, The Biblical Text in the Making – 1937)

The Masoretic Text is basically the revised bible of Akiva. Jesus warned us about the leaven of the Pharisees, so little wonder that the Pharisee bible has thousands of changes in it compared to both the earlier Hebrew Dead Sea Scrolls, and the Septuagint that the Christians had used. The Jewish Encyclopaedia says:

“With the destruction of the Temple (70 A.D.) the Sadducees disappeared altogether, leaving the regulation of all Jewish affairs in the hands of the Pharisees. Henceforth, Jewish life was regulated by the Pharisees; the whole history of Judaism was reconstructed from the Pharisaic point of view, and a new aspect was given to the Sanhedrin of the past. …Pharisaism shaped the character of Judaism and the life and thought of the Jew for all the future.”
(The Jewish Encyclopedia, 1905)

The Sadducees and Essenes were absorbed into the Pharisees after 70 AD. The Jewish aristocracy was destroyed by Vespasian, and leadership was gained by the Pharisee Johanan ben Zakai. The word Pharisee was eventually abandoned due to the slur cast on their name by Jesus.

The word Rabbi became more common; yet these Jews were the same Pharisee religion. The Jewish Encyclopaedia says: “The Jewish religion as it is today traces its descent, without a break, through all the centuries, from the Pharisees.” (The Universal Jewish Encyclopedia (1943), “Pharisees") There has been much written on the subject of the Masoretic origins by supporters of the Pharisees. Many errors have crept in that disguise the true history. There is an invested interest in religion and manuscript traditions. The Pharisees opposed the Septuagint after it was adopted by the Christians. The Rabbi’s banned the Septuagint, and likening it to the Golden Calf (Bernhard Pick, The Chronology of Bible Translations, page 5). They had actively sought out copies of the LXX for public burnings.

God Bless
Steve

 

[PropphecyStudent]

.
The Masoretic is older than the Septuagint
The Masoretic is not older than the LXX, and a pure Masoretic text older than 900 AD has not been found. This magician trick is used to make the Masoretic appear to be older than what it really is. Where is the evidence of this ridiculous statement? There is none!

How convenient to ignore the Masoretic Dead Sea (Qumram) Scrolls veracity of the Book of Daniel at ~150 B.C., which is nearly complete and virtually identical to the modern Daniel Masoretic text.

You neither explain or substantiate how in your version of "history" that the Masoretic text was dramatically changed in a short ~100 year span, or demonstrate that the Septuagint wasn't adulterated in that translation and in the span of time.

The Septuagint was translated from the Masoretic
The Septuagint was not translated from the Masoretic. Where is the evidence of this ridiculous statement? There is none! This lie is told because certain singular verses have been discovered which are identical in both texts. This only proves that the LXX and Masoretic were both translated from a common parent. The Dead Sea Scrolls also come from this same parent.

1. How bizarre. You would propose that a Hebrew language "parent" needed a Hebrew language translation? LOLOL

2. If you have evidence of a "common parent" then please present it.

The Dead Sea Scrolls prove the Masoretic is accurate
This is a huge lie that has been circulating to promote the idea that the bible has not been altered in any way. Where is the evidence of this ridiculous statement? There is none! The DSS are in fact closer to the Septuagint. The majority of the scholars involved with the DSS are Jewish, and of course, for them the DSS “prove” that the Masoretic is authentic. These scholars tell bold faced lies that are then circulated through the churches by self-appointed experts on orthodoxy. These same scholars also say that the Book of Daniel was not written by Daniel, but it was written by a scribe at about 150 BC. Daniel is not the oldest book found; this is a lie. Isaiah is the oldest manuscript found. The divine name is not found in the LXX or DSS (other than a dozen times). The Divine Name has been inserted into the Masoretic almost 7000 times in contradiction to the DSS, the LXX, the ST and the NT. This is evidence that the Masoretic has been altered dramatically. No other MSS follow the Masoretic.

http://www.apologeti...=13&article=357

Apologitics Press - The Dead Sea Scrolls

...
The Dead Sea Scrolls have lifted their voice in this controversy. Due to the amount of Daniel fragments found in various caves near Qumran, it appears that this prophetic book was one of the most treasured by that community. Perhaps the popularity of Daniel was due to the fact that the people of Qumran lived during the anxious period in which many of these prophecies actually were being fulfilled. For whatever reason, 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

As in the case of Isaiah, before Qumran there were no extant manuscripts of Daniel that dated earlier than the late tenth century A.D. Accordingly, scholars cast suspicion on the integrity of Daniel’s text. Also, as with Isaiah, this skepticism about the credibility of Daniel’s contents prompted scholars to take great freedom in adjusting the Hebrew text. One reason for this suspicion is the seemingly arbitrary appearance of Aramaic sections within the book. Some scholars had assumed from this linguistic shift that Daniel was written initially in Aramaic, and then some portions were translated into Hebrew. 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.

No other MSS follow the Masoretic.

As already cited, the KJV used the Masoretic Text.

ProphecyStudent, You are not adding any research to this post that is supported by facts; you are merely making broad statements that are unfounded. I would prefer you did not spread your unsupported lies on this post. If you want to believe these ridiculous assertions, that is your problem; this is evidence of your lack of research and blind support of your pet beliefs. Please do not make others fall into the same pit with you.

You make the same accusations as you fathers who murdered the prophets:

Steve, on 04 February 2012 - 12:29 AM, said:

... very confused
... an unbeliever who scoffs
... Your knowledge won’t save you
... devilish mannerisms
... Leave prophecy to those who have advanced more
... You do a dis-service to the entire church
... You cannot jump straight from nursery to prophet
... Leave it alone.

HeRoseFromTheDead, on 04 February 2012 - 09:24 AM, said:

... the trolls

Steve, on 04 February 2012 - 01:03 PM, said:

... errors in your logic; in your beliefs; in your evidence; and most importantly, in your heart.
... undeveloped in their spiritual walk
... faulty logic
... this must be corrected by obedience to God in other areas.
... puffed up with pride
... painting the outside of your tomb
... straining the gnat while gulping the camel
... read the bible with a servant’s heart
... learn obedience and respect before you start pulling words apart
... assuming you have “true knowledge”
... leave it alone

Steve, on 04 February 2012 - 01:50 PM, said:

...smug attitude

HeRoseFromTheDead, on 04 February 2012 - 05:50 PM, said:

... troll and thread spammer

... and are as Jesus described.




PropphecyStudent

 

[Stefcui]

ProphecyStudent, As I have asked you previously, and recently in my post, The 7th and 8th King, please stay off my posts. I know you have earmarked me to challenge everything I say. I do not believe you are a Christian, and I do not want to engage you in any way. You are only here to scatter. Please leave my posts alone.

Steve

 

[HeRoseFromTheDead]

ProphecyStudent, As I have asked you previously, and recently in my post, Faith verse Fruit, please stay off my posts. I know you have earmarked me to challenge everything I say. I do not believe you are a Christian, and I do not want to engage you in any way. You are only here to scatter. Please leave my posts alone.

Steve

I second that motion. Can the admins please step in and stop this person from continually spamming this thread?

 

[Stefcui]

I second that motion. Can the admins please step in and stop this person from continually spamming this thread?

It would be good if some measures were in place to council obsessive trouble makers. Perhaps ProphecyStudent could be offered some help? He obviously does not understand the responsibilities of Christianity. It is not his opinions that are affronting, it is his manner. Perhaps a “learners driving course” could be offered to those who repetitively crash into others?

Steve

 

[PropphecyStudent]

Hi,

I think you both may have missed the term "discuss" in this Forum Section title. If you don't want to participate in a "discussion", then you might be better served posting in the "Word of God Bible Study Forum", where you can pin your posts without discussion. Or you could host a homepage in which you can espouse whatever views you may have.