What do you know about the Septuagint?
Can anyone present an English translation of it online.
Why is it not used in our Bibles?
Can anyone present an English translation of it online.
Why is it not used in our Bibles?
Septuagint
- Thread starter tttallison
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
People print books to make money. They put nothing in those books that will lose money. That is just human nature.
Oxford University Press has taken on for themselves the Job of formulating a New Septuagint, which they call NETS (New English Translation of the Septuagint).
In the introduction to their new Septuagint, it says, “To the Reader of Nets” and on the 2nd paragraph it states the following-----------------------------"Not surprisingly then, though the various parts of "the translation of the seventy" have many features in common, it is also true that, as modern scholarship has increasingly shown, there is wide-ranging diversity and heterogeneity within the collection—to the point that some scholars now question the continued use of the term "Septuagint," which to the unwary reader might suggest a greater degree of uniformity than can be demonstrated. Though "Old Greek" would undoubtedly be a more suitable term to refer, in the case of each individual book or unit of translation, to the earliest rendition into Greek, NETS has bowed to the weight of tradition and has thus continued the use of the term "Septuagint."
For the last Century and a half what has been called the Septuagint was derived from two English translations, Charles Thompson’s and Charles Brenton’s.
The translations were 35 years apart (1808-1843), and based on a single manuscript, which is the Codex Vaticanus 1209. This is the same manuscript which all new translations are based on.
Oxford University Press has taken on for themselves the Job of formulating a New Septuagint, which they call NETS (New English Translation of the Septuagint).
In the introduction to their new Septuagint, it says, “To the Reader of Nets” and on the 2nd paragraph it states the following-----------------------------"Not surprisingly then, though the various parts of "the translation of the seventy" have many features in common, it is also true that, as modern scholarship has increasingly shown, there is wide-ranging diversity and heterogeneity within the collection—to the point that some scholars now question the continued use of the term "Septuagint," which to the unwary reader might suggest a greater degree of uniformity than can be demonstrated. Though "Old Greek" would undoubtedly be a more suitable term to refer, in the case of each individual book or unit of translation, to the earliest rendition into Greek, NETS has bowed to the weight of tradition and has thus continued the use of the term "Septuagint."
For the last Century and a half what has been called the Septuagint was derived from two English translations, Charles Thompson’s and Charles Brenton’s.
The translations were 35 years apart (1808-1843), and based on a single manuscript, which is the Codex Vaticanus 1209. This is the same manuscript which all new translations are based on.
The septuagint was the OT that the apostles quoted.
One perfect example of this is Hebrews 10:5 "Therefore, when Christ came into the world, he said: “Sacrifice and offering you did not desire, but a body you prepared for me;"
The latter part: "but a body you prepared for me" occurs in the septuagiant, but is nowhere to be found in our Old Testaments because they are based on the masoretic text.
One perfect example of this is Hebrews 10:5 "Therefore, when Christ came into the world, he said: “Sacrifice and offering you did not desire, but a body you prepared for me;"
The latter part: "but a body you prepared for me" occurs in the septuagiant, but is nowhere to be found in our Old Testaments because they are based on the masoretic text.
Probably because the septuagint is a translation, its the greek old testament. And usually when you are translating you want to translate from the original language, which in this case would be the hebrew for the OT and greek for the NT.
But are you not saying that the Greek is more accurate? They translated the New Testament from a manuscript that contained the Old Testament as well. Besides that, they say Matthew was written in Hebrew. Why not use a single manuscript?
In doing some investigating it should be noted that the New English Translation of the Septuagint has changed the reading of Psalm 40:6 to read "Sacrifice and offering you did not want, but ears you fashioned for me."
The Hebrew reads "Sacrifice and offering thou didst not desire; mine ears hast thou opened:"
The old reading was from the Codex Vaticanus 1209. The Codex Vaticanus 1209 was discredited back in 1580 by Lucas Burgensis, one of the learned men who assisted in the publication of the Biblia Regia at Antwerp. Here is his extract. "The Vatican edition of the Septuagint is taken from this manuscript (Vaticanus1209). It is greatly to be lamented that by length of time the end of the Epistle to the Hebrews, and the Pastoral Epistles, and the Revelation of St. John, have been lost. The other books as so decayed that it has been found necessary to draw fresh ink over the letters; but the manuscript in its present state has lost much of its credit by this, the persons employed in the work having sometimes not confined themselves to the old letters, but placed others in their room."
Note--This extract is taken from Religion and Philosophy/Introductory lectures to the sacred books of the New Testament. By John-David Michaelis. Pages 33-34.
I think that believers who desire to get as close as possible to the Truth, will use all available resources to do so. This would include the Septuagint. However, it should not be limited to the Septuagint or any one resource, (Unless we could have access to the original autographs but alas, they are no more).
I came across this information, which you might find interesting:
Definition: Septuagint Translation
Definition: The Septuagint (LXX) is a Greek translation of the Hebrew Bible, also known as the Old Testament, created in the 3rd century BCE. It is the oldest extant Greek version of the Hebrew Scriptures and was translated by Jewish scholars, traditionally said to be 70 or 72 in number, at the request of Ptolemy II.
Key characteristics:
- Translation from Hebrew: The Septuagint is a translation of the Hebrew text, not a direct copy. This means that the Greek text does not always reflect the exact wording or nuances of the original Hebrew.
- Koine Greek: The Septuagint was written in Koine Greek, the common language of the Mediterranean region during the Hellenistic period.
- Inclusive of deuterocanonical books: The Septuagint includes additional books not found in the Hebrew Bible, such as Tobit, Judith, and 1-2 Maccabees, which are considered deuterocanonical (secondary canonical) by Eastern Orthodox and Catholic traditions.
- Influence on the New Testament: The Septuagint had a significant impact on the development of the New Testament, as many New Testament authors quoted or alluded to the Septuagint rather than the original Hebrew text.
Canonical status: The Septuagint is considered canonical by Eastern Orthodox and Catholic traditions, while Jewish tradition does not recognize it as authoritative. Protestant traditions generally rely on the Hebrew Masoretic Text (MT) as the primary source for the Old Testament.
I was lied to for years by a pastor who read the Greek NT from the critical text and hated the traditional Received text aka TR, the Word of God.
That's mostly what you will also find with adherents to the Bible of the month club.
However, Dr Stringer knows more about the Septuagint than the scores of preachers and online commentators I've read. I would listen to him and go to his channel for a deeper study if you want to learn more.
Thank you for the video. I thought it was right on.
One thing that is very interesting about the Septuagint. The one group of people that you would assume would be using the Septuagint should be the Greek Orthodox Church in Greece. Approximately 85% of Greece identifies as Greek Orthodox as of 2022.
This is where the chain of evidence for the validity of the Septuagint should emerge. The Greek Orthodox Church traces its history back to the first century.
You might be amazed to find that the Greek Orthodox Church does not have a bible per se. They have their liturgy that they read every Sunday. This is according to His Eminence Metropolitan Isaiah of Proikonisou and Presiding Hierarch of the Greek Orthodox Diocese of Denver. Isaiah wrote an article for the Greek Orthodox Diocese of Denver Bulletin: March 1995, Volume 3, Number 3., pp. 14-17
Isaiah received his Master’s degree from the University of Thessaloniki in Greece.
There is a link to his article below. Which bible should I use.
Copy and paste the link below
https://churchmotherofgod.org/artic...entic Greek Text of the Bible is Preserved by
This is where the chain of evidence for the validity of the Septuagint should emerge. The Greek Orthodox Church traces its history back to the first century.
You might be amazed to find that the Greek Orthodox Church does not have a bible per se. They have their liturgy that they read every Sunday. This is according to His Eminence Metropolitan Isaiah of Proikonisou and Presiding Hierarch of the Greek Orthodox Diocese of Denver. Isaiah wrote an article for the Greek Orthodox Diocese of Denver Bulletin: March 1995, Volume 3, Number 3., pp. 14-17
Isaiah received his Master’s degree from the University of Thessaloniki in Greece.
There is a link to his article below. Which bible should I use.
Copy and paste the link below
https://churchmotherofgod.org/artic...entic Greek Text of the Bible is Preserved by
Do you know that almost every new translation derives its New Testament from only the Greek text, and that being mainly only one Greek text?
That Greek Text is the Vatican's Codex Vaticanus 1209. That same Codex Vaticanus 1209 is the manuscript from which the Septuagint (Old Testament) in English text was derived.
I would ask, does it matter that most of our New Testament translations were birthed from a proven corrupted text?
That Greek Text is the Vatican's Codex Vaticanus 1209. That same Codex Vaticanus 1209 is the manuscript from which the Septuagint (Old Testament) in English text was derived.
I would ask, does it matter that most of our New Testament translations were birthed from a proven corrupted text?
I agree more references should have been given to the Septuagint text, but does have many flaws.
Masoretic text---
Exodus 12:41
And at the end of four hundred and thirty years, on that very day, all the hosts of the Lord went out from the land of Egypt.
Septuagint and Syrian text says---land of Cannan and Egypt
Masoretic text---
Exodus 12:41
And at the end of four hundred and thirty years, on that very day, all the hosts of the Lord went out from the land of Egypt.
Septuagint and Syrian text says---land of Cannan and Egypt
Septuagint text---Isaiah 9:6 For a child is born to us, and a son is given to us, whose government is upon his shoulder: and his name is called the Messenger of great counsel: for I will bring peace upon the princes, and health to him.
Masoretic text---Isa 9:6 For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.
Dead Sea Scroll English translation---Isaiah 9:6 Because a child shall be born to us and a son is given to us and the government shall be upon his shoulders and he shall be called wonderful, counsellor, mighty God, everlasting father the prince of peace.
Notice how the text of the Septuagint, taken from the corrupt Codex Vaticanus 1209, has removed the Deity of Christ from Isaiah 9:6.
The Vaticanus 1209 manuscript removed the Trinity in 1John 5:7 in all new translations. It also removed God manifested in the flesh from 1 Timothy 3:16, as well as other scripture relating to the Deity of Christ.
Christian usage of the Septuagint.
The Early Christian church used the Greek texts,[15] since Greek was a lingua franca of the eastern parts of the Roman Empire at the time and the language of the Greco-Roman Church, while Aramaic was the language of Syriac Christianity. The relationship between the apostolic use of the Septuagint and the Hebrew texts is complicated. Although the Septuagint seems to have been a major source for the Apostles, it is not the only one. St. Jerome offered, for example, Matthew 2:15 and 2:23, John 19:37,[55] John 7:38,[56] and 1 Corinthians 2:9[57][58] as examples found in Hebrew texts but not in the Septuagint. Matthew 2:23 is not present in current Masoretic tradition either; according to Jerome, however, it was in Isaiah 11:1. The New Testament writers freely used the Greek translation when citing the Jewish scriptures (or quoting Jesus doing so), implying that Jesus, his apostles, and their followers considered it reliable.[59][35][15] (Septuagint wikipedia)
The Septuagint was good enough for the apostles then it is good enough for me.
You are quoting from Wikipedia.
You are saying that Jesus and the Apostles quoted from the Septuagint. Can you name the manuscripts that this Septuagint came from?
awelight greetings,
sorry I never replied to your post.
The Septuagint, as originally written, does not exist today. The Greek Orthodox Church never had its own bible. They used only their liturgy as the source of the Word of God. They claim their liturgy is based on the Septuagint, but that Septuagint is not the modern Septuagint. They claim that the English speaking Greek Orthodox church used the King James Bible because it aligned with their liturgy.
https://churchmotherofgod.org/artic...entic Greek Text of the Bible is Preserved by
The Oxford University Press attests to the fact that today's Septuagint is not the original Septuagint. You will find this information in the forward to the NETS (New English Translation of the Septuagint.)
NETS: New English Translation of the Septuagint
https://ccat.sas.upenn.edu/nets/edition/00-front-nets.pdf (To the Reader of Nets) Page xiii
The Significance of the Septuagint
The significance of the Septuagint translation can hardly be overestimated. Following the conquests of Alexander the Great (336-323 BC), Greek became the official language of Egypt, Syria and the eastern end of the Mediterranean Sea. The Septuagint translation made the Hebrew scriptures available both to the Jews who no longer spoke their ancestral language and to the entire Greek-speaking world. The Septuagint was later to become the Bible of the Greek-speaking early Church, and is frequently quoted in the New Testament.
(biblearchaeology.org)
It was the adoption of the Septuagint by the early Church that was the biggest factor in its eventual abandonment by the Jews. The Septuagint's use of parthenos, meaning 'virgin' in Isaiah 7:14 to describe the mother of the promised son Immanuel, was used by Matthew 1:23 as evidence for Yeshua's virgin birth.
(biblearchaeology.org)
The text used to translate the Septuagint was the Hebrew Pentateuch.
Jesus quoted from the LXX and read from it when he went into the Synagague in Nazareth. When Jesus quoted from the LXX which is known to be what was read in the 1st century Synagagues and called it "The Word of God" that tells us that a translation can be the Word of God.
If you insist on reading the scriptures from the ancient Hebrew then you are going to have to rely on the Masoretic text that was a translation of the LXX back into ancient Hebrew using their best attempt to restore the ancient Hebrew around 800 AD or between the 6th and 10th century (middle ages). They used the Samaritan Pentateuch to help them determine if they were recovering the ancient Hebrew since it was one of the best examples of ancient Hebrew but it is only 5 books of the bible. Supposedly the Masoretic text is a good attempt at recovering the language but you don't have good authority to insist that it trumps the LXX just because it is Hebrew. The challenge of translating from Koine Greek of the LXX to the ancient Hebrew and 1) Know that you are getting it right, and 2) restoring ryming words, play on words, idioms of ancient Hebrew is at best a noble attempt by the translators but should not be turned into an argument as being more DIVINE or inspired than the LXX since it is 800 years later. It is not the original manuscripts or even copies of the original Hebrew before the LXX which has been lost. The best we can do is to use the LXX to translate to Hebrew. You have no text older than the LXX to claim as your source. Your only argument for superiority of the Hebrew over the LXX is to try and persuade people that the translators in the 10 century were divinly inspired and the translators of the LXX were not. And I don't think you are going to persuade any thinking person of that.