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.


michael_legna's picture

I don't think there is huge disagreement

Alexander said -
Would follow one inherently mean deeply sinning by the other?

I don't think so, but that is coming from a perspective of one who accepts the Deuterocanonicals (what the Protestants call the Apocrypha). The big difference is the idea of praying for the Christians who have died before us, and asking them to pray for us, finds a lot of support in these "additional" texts. Of course some Protestants see this (mistakenly) as a form of worship and would think this is a major sin. But praying for the Church in heaven and having them pray for us is in no way a form of worship.

Its funny that this was not the issue that led the Jewish Council of Jamnia in 70 AD to remove them from the Old Testament Canon. They were more bothered by the use the Christians were making of these other books to support the claims for Jesus being the Messiah.