Septuagint still perfect?

Good Day, Chris

Would you mind filling some primary historical backing for some of this stuff?

In Him,

Bill

 

The early fathers thought the Septuagint inspired? ... well yeah...

.... They thought it was perfect???
I'd have to see some more evidence!

Here's one of the texts mentioned.

Jusin Martyr Dialogue with Trypho, a Jew
Chapter LXXI.—The Jews reject the interpretation of the LXX., from which, moreover, they have taken away some passages. [LINK]

Of course in the next chapter Justin Martyr seems to argue that the book of Esdras is Scripture.

The argument re: Isaiah 7:14 seems more complete in this text.

The First Apology of Justin Martyr
Chapter XXXIII.—Manner of Christ’s birth predicted.

Rob

 

Let me contribute a thought as well.

Welcome to the Baptist Board. :wavey:

Ed

 

Yeah, hi Chris, it's nice to have some new people and new ideas here!

Septuagint is a Greek translation of the OT

There are different versions of it, including Jewish and various Christian versions.

Some of its early history is derived from The Letter of Aristeas [LINK]
(Look at the bottom of page 108 and those following)

Read it with with a critical eye.
It is believed to be a 2nd century forgery, perhaps used to support a particular version.

The Greek translation of the Hebrew OT was the primary source of OT for early Christians.

In places it's just a down-right poor translation.
In other places it provides unique readings that some persuasively argue are superior to the Masoretic Hebrew text.

Rob

 

I think more than the Jews, some early Christians thought the LXX was inerrant. I just read recently that Augustin in City of God said that, but I haven't had time to run down the quote yet.

And welcome to the BB, Chris83! :wavey:

 

By the wayside : Here's a quote from an old Biblical Viewpoint article by Mark Sidwell.

Modern Christians need to gain an appreciation of his true worth in light of the shallow,intemperate,and historically uninformed attacks on Augustine by some modern conservative Christian writers.

 

It is often assumed the following:

1. There was a complete translation of the Old Testament in Greek before Jesus Christ
2. This was the translation used by Jesus and the Apostles

However, I have reason to believe that the Septuagint does not exist, at least, not in the manner that many think it does.

While there is no doubt translations of the Hebrew manuscripts into Greek, they were not done prior to the existence of Christianity, or the incarnation of Jesus Christ.

The LXX never existed.

To start with - a quote

Professor Kahle (1875 - 1964) "There never was any such thing as a pre-christian LXX"

Some facts

* No manuscripts of the LXX exist prior to 250AD
* The only evidence of any LXX before the New Covenant (ie BC) is from the "Letter to Aristeas".
* The writer of the Letter to Aristeas was a Jew who worshipped Greek philosophy, not Jehovah God of the Old Testament (Humphrey Hody, 1684, "De Biblorium Textibus 705")

* The actual Letter to Aristeas contains no mention of Bible translation, Bible doctrine, Bible truth, Biblical Languages or Bible preservation. It is all about Greek philosophy - If this translation did even exist, it was done by a group of Jewish gnostics, and should be disregarded anyway.

Interesting Information about the Letter of Aristeas

1. There were 72 translators, yet the translation is called the LXX = 70. What happened to the other two? According to the Letter, there were 6 elders from each tribe chosen to translate it. We read of the 70 elders of Israel in Numbers 11:16, but not 72. There is an inconsistency in the Jewish way here.

2. How did Aristeas get a hold of the 12 tribes? Noone but God knew where they were in 250BC, and there wasn't a priest in Jerusalem in 200BC who could find the genealogy for the 10 lost tribes!

3. Why would a group of 12 Tribes translate the Bible when only the Levites were entrusted with the job of being a custodian to the scriptures? (Mal 2:7, Deut 31:25, 26, 17:18)

a. If a Jew wrote the Letter to Aristeas, he was a heretic who denied his own scripture.

b. If he was a greek, he was ignorant of any Bible truth

c. If any scribe came down to Alexandria who was not a levite, God wouldn't have fooled with anything he was working on

Any quotations coming from this mythical Septuagint come from Greek manuscripts dating 100 - 300 years after Jesus Christ walked the earth. None exist prior to His incarnation, because the LXX did not exist, and the Letter to Aristeas is a fraud.


You can read a more indepth study in "Manuscript Evidence - Chapter IV" Available from Bible Baptist Bookstore Publishing.

A brief overview of the myth of the LXX is also available in Sam Gipps book "Answers"

God bless

Luke

 

Tripe alert! Sam Gipps?! Please,he's not noted for being very scholarly (I'm being charitable.)

 

I love it!

Forget the facts, let's make ad hominin attacks! The researcher doesn't have a piece of paper from a reformed school of lies! The actual author of that piece (which I abridged) was Dr Peter S Ruckman.

Rippon, if you think he is wrong, please read the chapter. If you are willing, I will type the entire chapter up, or scan it, and send it to you, so it won't cost you a cent, and you can refute it however you want, and I will read it, and everyone here will see you are right and he is wrong.

For you, it's all about education & philosophy, which is why Calvinism appeals to you. I know the topic isn't even about Calvinism, but friend, facts seems to have no bearing on your comments, as you disregard them in favour of names and education.

Run! Run back to your institutes & confessions.

 

Welcome to the BB, Chris83.

 

Chapter 43.—Of the Authority of the Septuagint Translation, Which, Saving the Honor of the Hebrew Original, is to Be Preferred to All Translations. [LINK]

Augustine was a great theologian...but he was no Hebrew scholar.
His argument was based upon legend rather than a knowledge of the textual differences.

Rob

 

Even though this is slightly off the subject, let me second what Deacon has said here, namely that i would suggest there is virtually no questiuon that -

"Augustine was a great theologian."

However, at times I do wonder if he were a good theologian.

Ed

 

Come, come, Rippon. You're anti-KJVO writers but for this LXXO writer? He believed in advanced revelation for the LXX, ala Ruckman and the KJV! :laugh:

 

Thanks, Rob, I appreciate the link. :wavey:

 

Hark, hark! :laugh:

He was a good sight better than Origen, though. (And what was the species of Origen, I wonder? :smilewinkgrin: )