Did the LXX Exist BEFORE the NT age.

Askjo can't post any proof because he has none. He's tried to turn the tables, but it just isn't working...is it??? Too bad, askjo.

 

I see you did not answer my question that mean you absolutely have NOOOOOO proof!

 

The answer to Askjo's question is "yes, it is called the Septuagint".

 

You are incapable to answer my simple question. A LOSER!

 

I asked the following earlier. Still waiting for an answer. Surely you do have reasons for your faith? Don't you?

Again could you document your findings? We would like to take a look at the reference ourselves.

 

Was LXX the TR?

 

Askjo won't answer because he can't. He comes on spewing his venomous version of the truth which he can't back up with proof and then asks others to prove their side when confronted with questions. Shows a lack of evidence and knowledge.

 

Again could you document your findings? We would like to take a look at the reference ourselves. </font>[/QUOTE]Another post not from me was posted here. You missed it.

 

It was a text and since it was read, it was recieved.

 

Askjo said "Was LXX the TR?"

The LXX was the "text" that they "received" and used, thanks to the Holy Spirit, according to the KJV translators and verified by 14 shelves of addition documentation that I have. I have also verified it personally by using my schematics to build my own time machine. I'd post the documentation, but I'm too busy dealing with lawyers from KFC and answering email from the CIA about Osama.

 

An interesting topic nevertheless. The evidence is compelling towards the existence of the LXX before the time of the New Testament documents' creation. Now there is credible evidence to suggest that several of the NT writers, or their secretaries, had their own translations from Hebrew into Greek...but this doesn't discredit the clear existence of the LXX before AD 1 (CE for all those cool kids on the block )

Some early NT church traditions would have used the LXX in their services, as opposed to the Hebrew text. Besides a survey of the pertinent texts in 2nd Temple Judiaism shows the existence of the LXX prior to AD 1.

 

You are on MV side, are you?

 

I am on the truth's side...something which you apparently know nothing of.

 

Yes, this is the second time I've read this dialogue.

It's nothing new for Ruckman, he's even done worse.

Amid his tyrades there are often legitimate questions and/or observations made.
To simply state the obvious concerning his demeanor doesn't help anyone he has in bondage to himself.

We need to disprove or discredit his erroneous claims as well.

HankD

 

You did not answer my question. I did NOT see you are on the truth's side. If you are on the truth side where I stand on, why did we disagree each other?

 

Aw come on. It's bbbbeeeeennnnn too much fun. </font>[/QUOTE]Whoops (he says sheepishly) I forgot to hit the "close" button .

 

You have posted no proof, and tried to turn the tables back to me with a question because you couldn't answer the calls for proof of your position. That's your problem, not mine. As far as I'm concerned until you do answer the questions many have asked you here instead of using your quirky circular reasoning and typical KJVO evasion tactics...you can ask questions all you want...they won't be answered.