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,

trueseek1's picture

Holy Spirit's use of Septuagint vs new translations uses

Don't mean to sound dogmatic, because I am not, but why is the burden not on the interpreters telling us why they use the masoretic hebrew texts when the Holy Spirit had his preference of the Greek Old Testament in the new testament?

For a Christian, why should we choose a masoretic hebrew later texts that try to change the meaning of the original away from Christ Jesus our LORD when God already settled this through a miracle during the making of the Septuagint? It seems easy to choose the same version that the Holy Spirit used in these verses and in many other Christ centered passages.

What is a modern translator's theory why early church fathers almost exclusively quoted from the Septuagint and what is their view of the miracle that occurred when 70 scholars in separate rooms came up with exact same phrases and translation in Greek when they were writing the Septuagint. They did not speak to each other or collaborate, but working separately, came up with the same translation? Can you imagine the odds of that happening ever?

Why do translators avoid using Christ in Psalm 2, and numerous other passages in the old testament, when they are clearly used there in Septuagint?

The current theory as to why our current LXX does not match the ones used by the Holy Spirit in the NT is that our LXX is not the oldest available manuscript of the original LXX, but at least we have almost all of it and seems to have a lot less mistakes than the modified hebrew versions on specially some very important passages.

"Matthew relies on the Septuagint for the assertion that the Messiah's mother was to be a virgin (Matthew 1.23). Jesus himself follows the traditional Septuagint wording in condemning the Pharisees' traditions (Matthew 15.8-9). " Now, here are the Holy Spirit's uses of Septuagint in Mathew vs masoretic "translation of some later hebrew documents" from the site I quoted above:

Matthew 1.23/ Isaiah 7.14 "Behold, a virgin shall conceive and bear a son, and his name shall be called Emmanuel" (which means, God with us). vs. hebrew masoretic "Behold, a young woman shall conceive and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel."

Matthew 12.21/ Isaiah 42.4 "and in his name will the Gentiles hope." vs. "and the coastlands wait for his law."

Matthew 13.14-15/ Isaiah 6.9-10 "For this people's heart has grown dull, and their ears are heavy of hearing, and their eyes they have closed" vs. "Make the heart of this people fat, and their ears heavy, and shut their eyes "

Matthew 15.8-9/ Isaiah 29.13 "in vain do they worship me, teaching as doctrines the precepts of men." vs. "and their fear of me is a commandment of men learned by rote "

Matthew 21.16/ Psalm 8.2 "Out of the mouths of babes and sucklings thou hast brought perfect praise" vs. "by the mouths of babes and infants thou hast founded a bulwark "

"Masoretic readings are preferred by the New Testament authors when they reference Job, Zechariah and Malachi." And "One wonders whether Jerome would have been able to overcome this evident social pressure against the Greek version if he had been aware of the diversity of the ancient Hebrew texts." But, I'm not sure I understand what's the pressure today that leads translators to avoid using the LXX at least almost always in all the books except maybe these 3, at least until God may grant us an older LXX and avoid using modified hebrew manuscripts in the other books? Why are most of today's translators almost unanimously using the hebrew texts in all places rather than the LXX?

I'm still uncertain why would honest Christians be resistant to using the Septuagint that rightly magnifies our LORD and His use of LXX?

humbly in His Service

humbly in Christ,
Anthony
http://ancientfaith.com/podcasts/illuminedheart/my_conversion_from_islam_to_orthodox_christianity_-_part_1




Advertisements