Alexandria Scriptures?

Question: Did those LXX MSS that Jesus, Paul, and others quoted from contain the Apocryphal books that make up the present LXX or not?

(I know that none of the NT writers actually quoted the LXX apocrypha directly [Jude's quote from 1 Enoch 1:9 is a matter of quoting pseudepigraphical material], but this does not answer the question as to whether those LXX MSS may have had the apocryphal books bound into them, just as with all existing MSS of the LXX that we possess).

If so, then were the LXX MSS in some way "corrupt"?

 

Do any believe that NO “corrupted” manuscripts ever came from Alexandria?

Interesting to note that even though he was “mighty in the Scriptures” Aquila and Priscilla still “expounded unto him the way of God more perfectly.”

Hope for us all!

 

Philip: "Is there really any doctrine in the Apocrypha that was included in the 1611 KJV that is not correct?"

Prayers for the dead: 2Mac 12:44-45 (KJV):

"For if he had not hoped that they that were slain should have risen again, it had been superfluous and vain to pray for the dead...Whereupon he made a reconciliation for the dead, that they might be delivered from sin."

 

Yes, that was my point.

Nope! I don’t have that information.

May I again inquire as to your answer on the Alexandrian manuscripts as you have only answered a question with a question and that is a tactic I only wish to reserve for mine own benefit when I do not wish to answer a question.

 

Please read my post above. I did, but let me take another whack at it.

I don't know if there are any uncorrupted Byzantine documents(titles, contracts,?) or,

Manuscripts.

Doest thou carriest thy chip on thy shoulder?

 

Well, maybe you do! As I have all the wealth I could possibly stand well,hrump, just deposit it into your favorite charity.

 

Some would say the LXX at some places is less corrupt than the Hebrew Massoretic text. Look at Ps. 145:13b (which is not in text of the NASB, NKJV, but included in the text of the NIV, HCSB): "The LORD is faithful in all his words and loving toward all he has made."

Each line of Ps. 145 begins with a consecutive letter of the Hebrew alphabet, so that by verse 14 we are to expect the NUN line after the MEM of v. 13, but in the Hebrew (except for a single MS) it is completely absent, skipping to the line that begins with SAMEK!

Did scribes/leaders think the Lord had not been faithful in all his words, and omit the line? (To me it seems they would have had to omit a great deal more in the canon than just this one verse!) Or did the composer omit it intentionally to draw attention to v. 14 or v. 13, or for some other reason? Or did the final "composer" of the OT canon omit it, whereas the other versions who were not privy to the final "updates" were left "corrupt"?

These are interesting questions. Does anyone wish to offer their explanations?

Yours,

Bluefalcon

 

Philip: "are there no uncorrupt Byzantine documents?"

Dogsbody: "I don't know if there are any uncorrupted Byzantine documents"

To solve the hypothetical dilemma: since to the present day no two Greek MSS of the NT have yet been demonstrated to agree in all particulars (this assuming not even a spelling or verbal difference), it should be presumed that all MSS are "corrupted" in some degree.

The amount of such "corruption" remains a matter of studying the particular habits of the scribes involved. These range from (most scribes) reasonably careful to (some scribes) very careless.

 

Dr Bob: "But TOGETHER in all 5500 documents and fragments, we have the Word of God preserved, pure and uncorrupted."

Does this include those UBS/Nestle readings that are supported by one and only one MS, ignoring the remainder of the 5499 extant MSS? (I refer in particular to certain readings already cited as having questionable support from only a single MS). And if not, on what basis are all remaining MSS in error and one alone correct? What process of manuscript transmission would result in such a situation? Or is it perhaps more likely the case that 5 editors may have erred in their eclectic decision at some points?