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.


geoffrobinson's picture

Some Quotes Closer to Masoretic

If some New Testament quotes are closer to the Masoretic, the argument for exclusively using the Septuagint doesn't work.

Textual criticism uses the Masoretic, the Septuagint, the Vulgate, the Targums, the Peshitta and any other valid sources it can get a hold of.

This argument for the LXX doesn't logically work. Why don't we use the Masoretic tradition which the New Testament sometimes follows? The Holy Spirit used other traditions than the one preserved in the Septuagint.