Romans 10:13

[The_Watchers_2017]

Sure! Hebrew Roots guy! Keep pushing this ignorance! Just wrong! I've already explained why! Nothing to do with the differences between the Hebrew OT& the Greek OT! They are doctrinally the same! I've read them both in the original languages! Have you?

Choosing the Version we know God gave directly to the Ancient Hebrews is nothing more than just Choosing which one is literally more Inspired by God.

The Tanakh is billions of times more the Pure words of God where the Septuagint is not even a correct translation.

God's power equals a Unicorn, from the Septuagint, is as Demonic as it gets comparing God to a Greek Mythical Creature.

Enjoy your false doctrine from your Hellenized Bible..

 

[VARob]

You should be ashamed to mention they quoted the Septuagint.

The fact remains, they did.

 

[Nehemiah6]

The fact remains. Jesus, Paul, and others quoted the LXX.

That is not "fact" but conjecture.

Did Jesus and the Apostles Rely on the Corrupt Septuagint?
Prabhudas Koshy

The Septuagint (aka LXX) or Greek translation of the OT is an unreliable version both yesterday and today. We cannot be certain of the authenticity of its readings. Its textual purity was questioned by Thackeray who said, “We are much more certain of the ipsissima verba of the NT writers than of the original Alexandrian version of the OT” (ISBE, s.v. “Septuagint”).

It has been claimed that Jesus and the Apostles quoted the Greek translation of the Old Testament, namely the Septuagint, even though they knew that it was corrupt. Why this claim? This claim is made to support the use of corrupted modern English versions of the Bible. It is argued that since Jesus and the Apostles used a corrupt Greek translation of the Old Testament, we today can also use corrupt modern versions of the Bible.

Some even allege that those who say that it is wrong to use a corrupt version of the Bible are in danger of accusing our Lord and His Apostles of sin. This allegation is inaccurate on two counts: (1) the assumption that Jesus and the Apostles quoted from the Septuagint is false, and (2) the promotion or support of the use of corrupt versions certainly dishonours Christ.

The claim that Jesus and the New Testament writers always used the Septuagint to quote from the Old Testament is without biblical evidence. It has been said that in the New Testament there are about 263 direct quotations from the Old. However, many of these Old Testament quotations in the New are significantly different from the Septuagint. If Jesus and the Apostles relied on the Septuagint for all their Old Testament quotations, such a difference would not have resulted.

There was no need for Jesus and the New Testament writers to rely on the Septuagint to quote the Old Testament. Jesus Himself was the Author of the Holy Scriptures. He could quote Hebrew Scriptures and translate them infallibly into Greek. As far as the Apostles were concerned, the Holy Spirit was their Chief Aide who supervised their writing of the Scriptures. There is nothing against them citing the Old Testament and translating the words into Greek themselves. Let us be mindful that both Testaments were inspired of the Holy Spirit; and that the Spirit was their infallible Author.

The New Testament’s translations and interpretations of the Old Testament are not taken from any corrupt human work. Whatever the New Testament says about the Old Testament, whether it is a translation into Greek or an interpretation, it must be viewed as the infallible and inerrant work of the Holy Spirit. Every word of the New Testament, including quotations, interpretations and applications of the Old Testament, is not from any corrupt human translation but from the Holy Spirit Himself. As such it is highly unlikely that Jesus and the New Testament writers quoted from the corrupt Septuagint as some allege.

Moreover, Jesus made no mention of the Greek Septuagint. Neither did He assert that His quotations were taken from the Septuagint, nor mention the Septuagint. However, He did speak about the Hebrew text of the Old Testament. In Matthew 5:18, He referred to the Hebrew text of the Old Testament when He said, “For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.” The jot (or yodh) is the smallest letter in the Hebrew alphabet; and the tittle is a portion of a letter that distinguishes two similarly written letters.

Here Jesus spoke authoritatively about the accuracy of the Hebrew text of the Old Testament. Jesus also declared His commitment to every letter of the Hebrew text of the Old Testament (Matt 5:17–18). It is impossible to think that Jesus who affirmed His absolute commitment to every letter of the Hebrew Text of the Old Testament would quote or endorse its corrupt translation. If Jesus used the Greek Septuagint, His scriptures would not have contained the jots and the tittles. He obviously used the Hebrew Scriptures and not its corrupt Greek version!

In addition, the descriptive designation of the Old Testament used by Jesus in the New Testament reveals that He used the Hebrew Scriptures instead of the Greek Septuagint. He often referred to the Old Testament as (1) “The Law and the Prophets” and (2) “The Law of Moses, the Prophets and the Psalms.” In Luke 24:44 we read, “And he said unto them, These are the words which I spake unto you, while I was yet with you, that all things must be fulfilled, which were written in the law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the psalms, concerning me.”

The reason for such a reference to the Old Testament was because the Hebrew Bible was then divided into three parts: the Law, the Prophets and the Writings. The Septuagint contained no such division. Not only that, the Septuagint contained the spurious Apocryphal books that have been mixed together with the canonical Old Testament. How could Jesus have possibly referred to the corrupt Septuagint if the order of the biblical books had already been hopelessly mixed up with the non-inspired Apocryphal books?

If Jesus had spoken only of His commitment to the Hebrew text of the Old Testament, how can one claim that Jesus relied on the corrupt Greek translation of the Old Testament Scriptures? Certainly such a statement is a misrepresentation of Christ.

Certainly the conduct of our Lord and the Apostles was very different from some of the modern day ministers who accept versions produced by men who deny the inspiration, infallibility and inerrancy of the Scriptures. Does it not dishonour Christ to allege that He and His Apostles quoted a version that was calculated to diminish the clarity and glory of true doctrines? It is startling that some would dare to attribute such a heinous act to Him and His Apostles!

It is impossible to think that Christ who is holy, just and truthful would endorse a translation that disregards the truth and the glory of the Almighty. The very nature of God would tell us that Christ would never have sanctioned the use of a corrupt Greek version of His Word. It is those who want to use inferior or corrupt modern versions, who say that Christ endorsed the corrupt Septuagint. Certainly we want to have no part in such an erroneous view of Christ.

In the pattern of Christ and His Apostles, we accept no inferior or corrupt translation, but the Hebrew and Greek Scriptures behind the KJV. As far as English translations go, the KJV is the best—the most faithful and most reliable.
https://www.febc.edu.sg/v15/article/def_Jesus_and_septuagint

 

[The_Watchers_2017]

The fact remains, they did.

And they also used the Torah, do you use the Torah and Tanakh like Paul used when breaking down the Law, since the LAW is Hebrew?

 

[The_Watchers_2017]

That is not "fact" but conjecture.

Did Jesus and the Apostles Rely on the Corrupt Septuagint?
Prabhudas Koshy

The Septuagint (aka LXX) or Greek translation of the OT is an unreliable version both yesterday and today. We cannot be certain of the authenticity of its readings. Its textual purity was questioned by Thackeray who said, “We are much more certain of the ipsissima verba of the NT writers than of the original Alexandrian version of the OT” (ISBE, s.v. “Septuagint”).

It has been claimed that Jesus and the Apostles quoted the Greek translation of the Old Testament, namely the Septuagint, even though they knew that it was corrupt. Why this claim? This claim is made to support the use of corrupted modern English versions of the Bible. It is argued that since Jesus and the Apostles used a corrupt Greek translation of the Old Testament, we today can also use corrupt modern versions of the Bible.

Some even allege that those who say that it is wrong to use a corrupt version of the Bible are in danger of accusing our Lord and His Apostles of sin. This allegation is inaccurate on two counts: (1) the assumption that Jesus and the Apostles quoted from the Septuagint is false, and (2) the promotion or support of the use of corrupt versions certainly dishonours Christ.

The claim that Jesus and the New Testament writers always used the Septuagint to quote from the Old Testament is without biblical evidence. It has been said that in the New Testament there are about 263 direct quotations from the Old. However, many of these Old Testament quotations in the New are significantly different from the Septuagint. If Jesus and the Apostles relied on the Septuagint for all their Old Testament quotations, such a difference would not have resulted.

There was no need for Jesus and the New Testament writers to rely on the Septuagint to quote the Old Testament. Jesus Himself was the Author of the Holy Scriptures. He could quote Hebrew Scriptures and translate them infallibly into Greek. As far as the Apostles were concerned, the Holy Spirit was their Chief Aide who supervised their writing of the Scriptures. There is nothing against them citing the Old Testament and translating the words into Greek themselves. Let us be mindful that both Testaments were inspired of the Holy Spirit; and that the Spirit was their infallible Author.

The New Testament’s translations and interpretations of the Old Testament are not taken from any corrupt human work. Whatever the New Testament says about the Old Testament, whether it is a translation into Greek or an interpretation, it must be viewed as the infallible and inerrant work of the Holy Spirit. Every word of the New Testament, including quotations, interpretations and applications of the Old Testament, is not from any corrupt human translation but from the Holy Spirit Himself. As such it is highly unlikely that Jesus and the New Testament writers quoted from the corrupt Septuagint as some allege.

Moreover, Jesus made no mention of the Greek Septuagint. Neither did He assert that His quotations were taken from the Septuagint, nor mention the Septuagint. However, He did speak about the Hebrew text of the Old Testament. In Matthew 5:18, He referred to the Hebrew text of the Old Testament when He said, “For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.” The jot (or yodh) is the smallest letter in the Hebrew alphabet; and the tittle is a portion of a letter that distinguishes two similarly written letters.

Here Jesus spoke authoritatively about the accuracy of the Hebrew text of the Old Testament. Jesus also declared His commitment to every letter of the Hebrew text of the Old Testament (Matt 5:17–18). It is impossible to think that Jesus who affirmed His absolute commitment to every letter of the Hebrew Text of the Old Testament would quote or endorse its corrupt translation. If Jesus used the Greek Septuagint, His scriptures would not have contained the jots and the tittles. He obviously used the Hebrew Scriptures and not its corrupt Greek version!

In addition, the descriptive designation of the Old Testament used by Jesus in the New Testament reveals that He used the Hebrew Scriptures instead of the Greek Septuagint. He often referred to the Old Testament as (1) “The Law and the Prophets” and (2) “The Law of Moses, the Prophets and the Psalms.” In Luke 24:44 we read, “And he said unto them, These are the words which I spake unto you, while I was yet with you, that all things must be fulfilled, which were written in the law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the psalms, concerning me.”

The reason for such a reference to the Old Testament was because the Hebrew Bible was then divided into three parts: the Law, the Prophets and the Writings. The Septuagint contained no such division. Not only that, the Septuagint contained the spurious Apocryphal books that have been mixed together with the canonical Old Testament. How could Jesus have possibly referred to the corrupt Septuagint if the order of the biblical books had already been hopelessly mixed up with the non-inspired Apocryphal books?

If Jesus had spoken only of His commitment to the Hebrew text of the Old Testament, how can one claim that Jesus relied on the corrupt Greek translation of the Old Testament Scriptures? Certainly such a statement is a misrepresentation of Christ.

Certainly the conduct of our Lord and the Apostles was very different from some of the modern day ministers who accept versions produced by men who deny the inspiration, infallibility and inerrancy of the Scriptures. Does it not dishonour Christ to allege that He and His Apostles quoted a version that was calculated to diminish the clarity and glory of true doctrines? It is startling that some would dare to attribute such a heinous act to Him and His Apostles!

It is impossible to think that Christ who is holy, just and truthful would endorse a translation that disregards the truth and the glory of the Almighty. The very nature of God would tell us that Christ would never have sanctioned the use of a corrupt Greek version of His Word. It is those who want to use inferior or corrupt modern versions, who say that Christ endorsed the corrupt Septuagint. Certainly we want to have no part in such an erroneous view of Christ.

In the pattern of Christ and His Apostles, we accept no inferior or corrupt translation, but the Hebrew and Greek Scriptures behind the KJV. As far as English translations go, the KJV is the best—the most faithful and most reliable.
https://www.febc.edu.sg/v15/article/def_Jesus_and_septuagint

AMEN!!

 

[VARob]

but the Hebrew and Greek Scriptures behind the KJV. As far as English translations go, the KJV is the best—the most faithful and most reliable.

And there you have it.. KJV Onlyism. I hope that one day you escape from that erroneous belief.

 

[The_Watchers_2017]

The KJV uses Greek Myth just like the Septuagint. 7 times a mythical creature is mentioned, the Unicorn.

Everyone knows Erasmus used the Septuagint for Textus Receptus which is part of the KJV. He admitted to it and that it also was incorrect. And we know he was then FORCED to submit his work.

False Doctrine has been around so long it's even influenced how Bibles are translated. TULIP is another one of those False Doctrine coming from the Septuagint backed Textus Receptus KJV.

 

[VARob]

False Doctrine has been around so long it's even influenced how Bibles are translated. TULIP is another one of those False Doctrine

I agree with that much.

Calvinism (TULIP) did not come from the LXX.

 

[The_Watchers_2017]

I agree with that much.

Calvinism (TULIP) did not come from the LXX.

Calvinism, is more of taking this Verse from here, where it already has an Inspired intended Meaning, and placing it where it never was supposed to Belong and make it into a New Meaning.
Ironically though, when you compare Verses used in this Doctrine between the Hellenized Classical Greek, the Koine Greek of Yeshua's day, "Aramaic, Hebrew (Torah/Tanakh)" there's even discrepancies with the Original Meaning to some Verses in their original content before they are Moved to become a Newer completely different Meaning.
And that literally Speaks volumes when you understand just how far off that Verse really is to be USED for a False Doctrine.

 

[The_Watchers_2017]

Calvinism, is more of taking this Verse from here, where it already has an Inspired intended Meaning, and placing it where it never was supposed to Belong and make it into a New Meaning.
Ironically though, when you compare Verses used in this Doctrine between the Hellenized Classical Greek, the Koine Greek of Yeshua's day, "Aramaic, Hebrew (Torah/Tanakh)" there's even discrepancies with the Original Meaning to some Verses in their original content before they are Moved to become a Newer completely different Meaning.
And that literally Speaks volumes when you understand just how far off that Verse really is to be USED for a False Doctrine.

PRIME EXAMPLE:

Look at the Greek of the New Testament, it flows directly with the Hebrew of the Torah/Tanakh, to which Jesus was adamant about in Luke when He defined the Tanakh in Luke by mentioning the Proper Order LAW-PROPHETS-Songs/Psalms.
44 Then He said to them, “These are My words which I spoke to you while I was still with you—everything written concerning Me in the Torah of Moses and the Prophets and the Psalms must be fulfilled. btw, What Yeshua just described is the 24 BOOKS of the Tanakh, not the 39 we falsely have!

The Greek of the New Testament actually does not flow with the Hellenized Mythical Greek at all.

Agreed, the Apostles and Luke and James/Jude/Paul's Disciples, etc wrote in Koine Greek, except Matthew, but the Koine Greek flows like you are reading the Torah and Tanakh.
The Septuagint is horrible!

 

[Magenta]

Awesome share!! I was moved the first time that I heard it... and still find it glorifying to God

I too believe that God had been at work in my life long, long before I came to accept and believe - way before Salvation.

Thank you, Ted .. And that is awesome that we share the same viewpoint/understanding, knowing
God personally and being aware of and able to acknowledge that God was seeking us and working
in our lives before we ever came to accept the Truth of His revealed written Word .

 

[VARob]

btw, What Yeshua just described is the 24 BOOKS of the Tanakh, not the 39 we falsely have!

Great. Another person who thinks the Bible needs to be "fixed."

 

[The_Watchers_2017]

Great. Another person who thinks the Bible needs to be "fixed."

Are you aware of what happened?

Jerome, decided to organize some of the Writings of the Old Testament according to a timeline in actual History. He also took the 1 Massive Text of Chronicles and Kings and split them into 2 Books each. So, it's not that we are missing information here, it's just not in the Proper Order that God gave them to the Hebrew Peoples, so some have become Books that weren't Books before and some have become just a way of how Jerome decided to Arrange the Old Testament.

But yes, there is only factually 24 Books, the same number amount of Letters in the Hebrew Alphabet, 24 characters, 24 Numbers, etc. Everything is connected from Alphabet to Numbers to Books of the Tanakh.

 

[VARob]

Are you aware of what happened?

Jerome, decided to organize some of the Writings of the Old Testament according to a timeline in actual History. He also took the 1 Massive Text of Chronicles and Kings and split them into 2 Books each. So, it's not that we are missing information here, it's just not in the Proper Order that God gave them to the Hebrew Peoples, so some have become Books that weren't Books before and some have become just a way of how Jerome decided to Arrange the Old Testament.

But yes, there is only factually 24 Books, the same number amount of Letters in the Hebrew Alphabet, 24 characters, 24 Numbers, etc. Everything is connected from Alphabet to Numbers to Books of the Tanakh.

You may not, but I agree with the canon that we have in the 66 book Protestant Bible.

 

[The_Watchers_2017]

You may not, but I agree with the canon that we have in the 66 book Protestant Bible.

The fact is, we can also claim that Abraham is our father, just like the Jews and Muslims. So, as children of Abraham, we should use the Bible being passed down by God, that is constructed with Abraham being the father of many Nations. That is the Hebrew. That is our REAL true Heritage and Past, not the Greek knockoff.

When I accepted God, I made a decision by the Inspiration of the Holy Spirit, to use the Hebrew for the Old Testament because it truthfully is the most factual and truest Version of the Old Testament. And tell me: whoever claims to love God, but doesn't love the Truest Version about Him, so we know Him the best possible way. What THEN, are they really saying here, God doesn't really matter that much to know Him the best possible way?

 

[VARob]

The fact is, we can also claim that Abraham is our father, just like the Jews and Muslims. So, as children of Abraham, we should use the Bible being passed down by God, that is constructed with Abraham being the father of many Nations. That is the Hebrew. That is our REAL true Heritage and Past, not the Greek knockoff.

I am a Christian, not a Hebrew.

When I accepted God, I made a decision by the Inspiration of the Holy Spirit, to use the Hebrew for the Old Testament because it truthfully is the most factual and truest Version of the Old Testament. And tell me: whoever claims to love God, but doesn't love the Truest Version about Him, so we know Him the best possible way. What THEN, are they really saying here, God doesn't really matter that much to know Him the best possible way?

The autographs would be the truest version of the OT, but there aren't any left. The LXX was translated from copies much older than the ones the Masoretic texts were translated from. And again, don't forget that Jesus, Paul, and the other NT writers frequently quoted the LXX.

Don't get me wrong, I love the OT, but if you want to learn about Christianity, you have to read the NT, particularly Paul's epistles.

 

[The_Watchers_2017]

I am a Christian, not a Hebrew.

so, you have been Adopted. Don't you even know what is included in this Adoption? Your Heritage is Abraham!

The autographs would be the truest version of the OT, but there aren't any left. The LXX was translated from copies much older than the ones the Masoretic texts were translated from. And again, don't forget that Jesus, Paul, and the other NT writers frequently quoted the LXX.

The Autographs? HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
Moses wrote 13 [[THIRTEEN]] copies of the Torah, 1 for the Ark of the Covenant and 1 for each of the 12 Tribes of Jacob. Many of those survived. Yeah, I could tell you don't know what you're fighting for. It's all good. This ain't a Salvation Issue, just a Discussion.

Don't get me wrong, I love the OT, but if you want to learn about Christianity, you have to read the NT, particularly Paul's epistles.

John 1:1 the WORD made flesh.

Christianity is just an association, the WORD, is the Law/Prophets/Psalms, that is WHO we need to know most of all.

 

[VARob]

Moses wrote 13 [[THIRTEEN]] copies of the Torah, 1 for the Ark of the Covenant and 1 for each of the 12 Tribes of Jacob.

Citation needed.

Many of those survived.

Citation needed.

Christianity is just an association

I think we have different religions.

 

[The_Watchers_2017]

The_Watchers_2017 said:
Moses wrote 13 [[THIRTEEN]] copies of the Torah, 1 for the Ark of the Covenant and 1 for each of the 12 Tribes of Jacob.

Citation needed.

Public Torah Readings
Deuteronomy 31:
9 Moses wrote down this Torah and gave it to the kohanim, the sons of Levi who carry the Ark of the Covenant of Adonai, and to all the elders of Israel.

btw: All the ELDERS = Leader of each Tribe of Israel, is 12 of them!

 

[The_Watchers_2017]

The_Watchers_2017 said:
Many of those survived.


Citation needed.

The great success of Jewish tradition is the meticulous transmission of the Torah text. But actually how accurate is it?

How do we know that the Torah we have today is the same text given on Mount Sinai?
The Torah was originally dictated from God to Moses, letter for letter. From there, the Midrash (Devarim Rabba 9:9) tells us:

​

Before his death, Moses wrote 13 Torah Scrolls. Twelve of these were distributed to each of the 12 Tribes. The 13th was placed in the Ark of the Covenant (with the Tablets). If anyone would come and attempt to rewrite or falsify the Torah, the one in the Ark would "testify" against him. (Likewise, if he had access to the scroll in the Ark and tried to falsify it, the distributed copies would "testify" against him.)​

How were the new scrolls verified? An authentic "proof text" was always kept in the Holy Temple in Jerusalem, against which all other scrolls would be checked.Following the destruction of the Second Temple in 70 CE, the Sages would periodically perform global checks to weed out any scribal errors.