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,

Erick M's picture

LXX As Inspired OT

I agree with you Trueseek, there is no logical reason not to have the Septuagint as a valid version of the OT. In fact, it should be the authoritative text that is used among Christians as it was for more than a millenium. The Masoretic should be used as a reference only.
Try looking for a Bible with a LXX Old Testament and a New Testament combined. There are so few it is really quite mind boggling when considering how many Bibles are available with the MT as the base text of the OT. One could speculate on how and why it came to be that the accepted version of the Christian Old Testament is one that was compiled by 3rd century rabbi's with anti-Christian motives. More than a few Messianic prophecies of Jesus were altered by these rabbi's to make sure that they would not be used in reference to Jesus. Of course modern translators make sure to use the LXX in these cases; but one must ask: if the LXX can be trusted in these cases and the MT not, then why are we citing the MT as being authoritative?

God bless




Advertisements