Should we trust the Septuagent like the Holy Spirit does?

trueseek1's picture

Recently read that the men who were under the infallible inspiration of the Holy Spirit and wrote down what we call New Testament, quoted almost always the Septuagent version of the Old Testament even when it disagrees with the Hebrew version even slightly. Wondering are we "liberals" who use modern scholarly techniques to lower the trustworthiness of the Greek Old Testament translation (LXX) by trusting the Hebrew version instead? Can not understand how I as a Bible believing Christian can justify such a move since I believe the New Testament authors were under the infallible inspiration of the Holy Spirit when they quoted from the Septuagent version of the Old Testament? It seems also the early Church fathers almost exclusively quoted from the same greek translation to strongly point to Christ as the fulfiller of all old testament prophecies. Eusebius was specially illuminating on this one recently.

Appreciate any other Bible believers' viewpoints on this one.

humbly,

What you see depends on what you look for

trueseek1, that was kind of long... but I concur with many of your statements. Just a note... "Anointed one" and "Christ": These are Greek transliterations (like the words 'apostle' and 'baptize') rather than translations ('ambassador' and 'wash'.) I think the important thing is consistency in the translation: if we say "Christ" in place of "anointed one" in the New Testament, we should also say "Christ" in place of "anointed one" in the Old Testament as well. Its more difficult to compare meters and feet!

Lastly, a thought to chew on... if someone has never seen a bird before, how will they know a condor when they see it? On the other hand, if a group of 70 ornithologists see a condor, how well will they describe it, even if they don't immediately recognize it as a condor?




Advertisements