The Greek Septuagint

[journey42]

The Greek Septuagint — some Christians swear by it, and other Christians have never heard of it. It is common for the new-age bible version defenders to call upon the Greek Septuagint in their time of weakness, but as we will demonstrate in this article, the Greek Septuagint never existed.

“The Codex Semitics and the Codex Vaticanus are versions of the Old Testament derived from the Greek Sptuagint, which scholars date to around 350 A.D.
New Testament writers often used the Septuagint when they quoted from the Old Testament.”

“The Christians in Carthage were taking the Septuagint as the standard… a new standard developed over time, that being the Septuagint. It became, by traditional usage, the Bible for these Christians.”

As you can see, many Christian authors are backing up this “Septuagint” as manuscript evidence in defense of things like “Codex Vaticanus,” which was developed by pagan, heretical men who did not believe in the Gospel of Jesus Christ, and one of the very few manuscripts used to produce the Catholic bible versions, and likewise, many subsequent new-age versions we see today.

“THE LETTER OF ARISTEAS”
There is a letter called “The Letter of Aristeas,” that describes a translation of the Old Testament, from Hebrew to Greek, that was sent to Alexandria, Egypt by Biblical scholars in Jerusalem. The supposedly “official” document referred to in “The Letter to Aristeas” is called the LXX, or known today as The Septuagint, because it was said to have been translated by 72 Jewish scholars.
(LXX is roman numerals for 70, but there were 72 translators, so why it is not called LXXII is anyone's guess.)
The end of the Old Testament is around 397 B.C.,
and the Septuagint is supposedly dated around 250 B.C.,
which is in a roughly 400 year period of Biblical silence up until the birth of Christ.

Before we go into detail, it should be emphasized that the “Letter of Aristeas,” is the ONLY evidence for the existence of the Septuagint.
There are no Greek Old Testament manuscripts that are dated at 250 B.C. in the known world. At the very least, it would be logical to expect Jewish historical data to confirm such a project, since sending the Law of God out in Hebrew format out of Israel would have been taken incredibly seriously, let alone a translation of the law and prophets into a foreign language, but no such Jewish document exists even hinting at such a project.

Objections will immediately be raised by those who use the Septuagint as a source, claiming that Origen of Alexandria's Hexapla (an edition of the Bible in six versions) has a column that he copied directly from the Septuagint, but based on what evidence other than vague claims? Even if they want to make that argument, Origen's Hexapla was written about 200 A.D., over 100 years after the New Testament was completed, and contains apocryphal books (e.g. Judith, Tobit, Bel and the Dragon, etc) which were never accepted as part of Scripture by the Jews, and only accepted as Scripture by the Roman Catholic church 200 years later. If Origen copied directly from the Septuagint, that means the Septuagint contained the apocryphal books, and that means the 72 Jewish scholars would had to have added in the apocryphal books BEFORE they were originally authored!
(Either that, or Origen added to the Word of God and made them up himself, which is a directly violation of Rev 22:18)

In fact, the ONLY Greek manuscript of the Old Testament from before the time of Christ in existance today is Ryland's Papyrus #458, which contains only 6 chapters of Deuteronomy. That's it. Someone might have a creative imagination about the “Septuagint,” but we have no historical evidence for the a Greek edition of the Old Testament before the time of Christ, and historians know that filling in the blanks with whatever they please is not considered proper research.

This gets even stranger when we realize that “Aristeas” may never have existed. In fact, in this author's research, I can find no mention of any historical references of an “Aristeas” who lived during the day the letter was said to have been written. It is not certain if an Aristeas ever existed, but a large foundation is placed by new-age bible defenders on the “Septuagint,” which does not exist, and that is based solely on the author of a letter who also may not exist, or at the very least, lied about his identity.

“The writer of this letter, Aristeas, claims to have been a Greek court official during the time of Philadelphus' reign. He claims to have been sent by Demetrius to request the best scholars of Israel to bring a copy of the Hebrew scriptures to Alexandria to start the Septuagint translation project. He even goes so far as to give names of Septuagint scholars, yet many of the names he gives are from the Maccabean era, some 75 years too late. Many of them are Greek names, definitely not the names of Hebrew scholars. There are many other evidences that this letter is from a different time period, and is thus a fake. The writer is lying about his identity. The supposed 'librarian,' Demetrius of Phalerum (ca. 345-283) served in the court of Ptolemy Soter. Demetrius was never the librarian under Philadelphus. The letter quotes the king telling Demetrius and the translators, when they arrived, how wonderful it was that they came on the anniversary of his 'naval victory over Antigonus' (Aristeas 7:14). But the only such recorded Egyptian naval victory occurred many years after Demetrius death, so the letter is a fraud.”

There are Biblical problems with the Septuagint as well; one of the biggest being that it was supposed to be comprised of scholars from all twelve tribes of Israel for translation. All throughout the Old Testament, the Levites were the keepers of God's Word (Deut 31:25-36) and the temple, so why would the other tribes violate the position given by God specifically to the Levites to oversee?

Why are the new-age bible defenders so eager to put the Septuagint on a pedestal, despite the fact that is has no historical evidence to back it up, and powerful arguments are easily made against it?

I think we can end this article with a quote from Sam Gip
p, scholar of Greek and Hebrew, who says it best:
“Hebrew is an extremely difficult language to learn. It takes years of study to attain a passing knowledge of it. And many more to be well enough versed to use it as a vehicle of study. By comparison a working knowledge of Greek is easily attainable. Thus, IF THERE WAS an official translation of the Old Testament into Greek, Bible critics could triple the field of influence overnight without a painstaking study of biblical Hebrew. Unfortunately, the acceptance of the existence of the Septuagint on such thin evidence is based solely on pride and voracity.”

I did not write this article in my own words, for it is easy to understand.
Journey42

[terraricca]

Compositions[edit]

Legend[edit]
These titles refer to a legendary story, according to which seventy or seventy-two Jewish scholars were asked by the Greek King of Egypt Ptolemy II Philadelphus to translate the Torah from Biblical Hebrew into Greek, for inclusion in the Library of Alexandria.[8] This legend is first found in the pseudepigraphic Letter of Aristeas to his brother Philocrates,[9] and is repeated with embellishments by Philo of Alexandria, Josephus[10][11] and by various later sources, including St. Augustine.[12] A version of the legend is found in the Tractate Megillah of the Babylonian Talmud:
King Ptolemy once gathered 72 Elders. He placed them in 72 chambers, each of them in a separate one, without revealing to them why they were summoned. He entered each one's room and said: “Write for me the Torah of Moshe, your teacher”. God put it in the heart of each one to translate identically as all the others did.[13]
Philo of Alexandria, who relied extensively on the Septuagint,[14] says that the number of scholars was chosen by selecting six scholars from each of the 12 tribes of Israel.
History[edit]
The date of the 3rd century BCE, given in the legend, is confirmed (for the Torah translation) by a number of factors, including the Greek being representative of early Koine, citations beginning as early as the 2nd century BCE, and early manuscripts datable to the 2nd century.[15]
After the Torah, other books were translated over the next two to three centuries. It is not altogether clear which was translated when, or where; some may even have been translated twice, into different versions, and then revised.[16] The quality and style of the different translators also varied considerably from book to book, from the literal to paraphrasing to interpretative.
The translation process of the Septuagint can be broken down into several distinct stages, during which the social milieu of the translators shifted from Hellenistic Judaism to Early Christianity. The translation began in the 3rd century BCE and was completed by 132 BCE,[17][18][19] initially in Alexandria, but in time elsewhere as well.[5]
The Septuagint is the basis for the Old Latin, Slavonic, Syriac, Old Armenian, Old Georgian and Coptic versions of the Christian Old Testament.[20]
Language[edit]
Some sections of the Septuagint may show Semiticisms, or idioms and phrases based on Semitic languages like Hebrew and Aramaic.[21] Other books, such as Daniel and Proverbs, show Greek influence more strongly.[8] Jewish Koine Greek exists primarily as a category of literature, or cultural category, but apart from some distinctive religious vocabulary is not so distinct from other varieties of Koine Greek as to be counted a separate dialect.
The Septuagint is also useful for elucidating pre-Masoretic Hebrew: many proper nouns are spelled out with Greek vowels in the LXX, while contemporary Hebrew texts lacked vowel pointing.[22] One must, however, evaluate such evidence with caution since it is extremely unlikely that all ancient Hebrew sounds had precise Greek equivalents.[23]
Disputes over canonicity[edit]
As the work of translation progressed, the canon of the Greek Bible expanded. The Torah (Pentateuch in Greek) always maintained its pre-eminence as the basis of the canon, but the collection of prophetic writings, based on the Jewish Nevi'im, had various hagiographical works incorporated into it.
In addition some newer books were included in the Septuagint: those called anagignoskomena in Greek, because they are not included in the Jewish canon. Among these are the Maccabees and the Wisdom of Ben Sira. Also, the Septuagint version of some Biblical books, like Daniel and Esther, are longer than those in the Jewish canon.[24] Some of these “apocryphal” books (e.g. the Wisdom of Solomon, and the second book of Maccabees) were not translated, but composed directly in Greek.
It is not known when the Ketuvim (“writings”) or final part of the three part Masoretic Canon was established, although some sort of selective processes must have been employed because the Septuagint did not include other well-known Jewish documents such as Enoch or Jubilees or other writings that are not part of the Jewish canon. (These are now classified as Pseudepigrapha).
Since Late Antiquity, once attributed to a Council of Jamnia, mainstream rabbinic Judaism rejected the Septuagint as valid Jewish scriptural texts. Several reasons have been given for this. First, some mistranslations were claimed. Second, the Hebrew source texts used for the Septuagint differed from the Masoretic tradition of Hebrew texts, which was chosen as canonical by the Jewish rabbis.[25] Third, the rabbis wanted to distinguish their tradition from the newly emerging tradition of Christianity.[19][26] Finally, the rabbis claimed for the Hebrew language a divine authority, in contrast to Aramaic or Greek – even though these languages were the lingua franca of Jews during this period (and Aramaic would eventually be given the same holy language status as Hebrew).[27]
In time the LXX became synonymous with the “Greek Old Testament”, i.e. a Christian canon of writings which incorporated all the books of the Hebrew canon, along with additional texts. The Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox Churches include most of the books that are in the Septuagint in their canons; however, Protestant churches usually do not. After the Protestant Reformation, many Protestant Bibles began to follow the Jewish canon and exclude the additional texts, which came to be called “Apocrypha” (originally meaning “hidden” but became synonymous with “of questionable authenticity”). The Apocrypha are included under a separate heading in the King James Version of the Bible, the basis for the Revised Standard Version.[28]
Final form[edit]
See also Table of books below.
All the books of western canons of the Old Testament are found in the Septuagint, although the order does not always coincide with the Western ordering of the books. The Septuagint order for the Old Testament is evident in the earliest Christian Bibles (4th century).[8]
Some books that are set apart in the Masoretic text are grouped together. For example the Books of Samuel and the Books of Kings are in the LXX one book in four parts called Βασιλειῶν (“Of Reigns”). In LXX, the Books of Chronicles supplement Reigns and it is called Paraleipoménon (Παραλειπομένων—things left out). The Septuagint organizes the minor prophets as twelve parts of one Book of Twelve.[8]
Some scripture of ancient origin are found in the Septuagint but are not present in the Hebrew. These additional books are Tobit, Judith, Wisdom of Solomon, Wisdom of Jesus son of Sirach, Baruch, Letter of Jeremiah (which later became chapter 6 of Baruch in the Vulgate), additions to Daniel (The Prayer of Azarias, the Song of the Three Children, Susanna and Bel and the Dragon), additions to Esther, 1 Maccabees, 2 Maccabees, 3 Maccabees, 4 Maccabees, 1 Esdras, Odes, including the Prayer of Manasseh, the Psalms of Solomon, and Psalm 151.
The canonical acceptance of these books varies among different Christian traditions, and there are canonical books not derived from the Septuagint. For more information regarding these books, see the articles Biblical apocrypha, Biblical canon, Books of the Bible, and Deuterocanonical books.
Incorporations from Theodotion[edit]
In most ancient copies of the Bible which contain the Septuagint version of the Old Testament, the Book of Daniel is not the original Septuagint version, but instead is a copy of Theodotion's translation from the Hebrew, which more closely resembles the Masoretic text. The Septuagint version was discarded in favour of Theodotion's version in the 2nd to 3rd centuries CE. In Greek-speaking areas, this happened near the end of the 2nd century, and in Latin-speaking areas (at least in North Africa), it occurred in the middle of t
he 3rd century. History does not record the reason for this, and St. Jerome reports, in the preface to the Vulgate version of Daniel, This thing 'just' happened.[29] One of two Old Greek texts of the Book of Daniel has been recently rediscovered and work is ongoing in reconstructing the original form of the book.[8]
The canonical Ezra-Nehemiah is known in the Septuagint as “Esdras B”, and 1 Esdras is “Esdras A”. 1 Esdras is a very similar text to the books of Ezra-Nehemiah, and the two are widely thought by scholars to be derived from the same original text. It has been proposed, and is thought highly likely by scholars, that “Esdras B” – the canonical Ezra-Nehemiah – is Theodotion's version of this material, and “Esdras A” is the version which was previously in the Septuagint on its own.[29]
Use[edit]

Jewish use[edit]
See also: Development of the Hebrew Bible canon
Starting approximately in the 2nd century CE, several factors led most Jews to abandon use of the LXX. The earliest gentile Christians of necessity used the LXX, as it was at the time the only Greek version of the Bible, and most, if not all, of these early non-Jewish Christians could not read Hebrew. The association of the LXX with a rival religion may have rendered it suspect in the eyes of the newer generation of Jews and Jewish scholars.[20] Instead, Jews used Hebrew/Aramaic Targum manuscripts later compiled by the Masoretes; and authoritative Aramaic translations, such as those of Onkelos and Rabbi Yonathan ben Uziel.[30]
What was perhaps most significant for the LXX, as distinct from other Greek versions, was that the LXX began to lose Jewish sanction after differences between it and contemporary Hebrew scriptures were discovered (see above). Even Greek-speaking Jews tended less to the LXX, preferring other Jewish versions in Greek, such as that of the 2nd-century Aquila translation, which seemed to be more concordant with contemporary Hebrew texts.[20] While Jews have not used the LXX in worship or religious study since the 2nd century CE, recent scholarship has brought renewed interest in it in the field of Judaic Studies.
Christian use[edit]
See also: Development of the Old Testament canon
The Early Christian Church used the Greek texts[31] since Greek was a lingua franca of the Roman Empire at the time, and the language of the Greco-Roman Church (Aramaic was the language of Syriac Christianity, which used the Targums).
The relationship between the apostolic use of the Old Testament, for example, the Septuagint and the now lost Hebrew texts (though to some degree and in some form carried on in Masoretic tradition) is complicated. The Septuagint seems to have been a major source for the Apostles, but it is not the only one. St. Jerome offered, for example, Matt 2:15 and 2:23, John 19:37, John 7:38, 1 Cor. 2:9.[32] as examples not found in the Septuagint, but in Hebrew texts. (Matt 2:23 is not present in current Masoretic tradition either, though according to St. Jerome it was in Isaiah 11:1.) The New Testament writers, when citing the Jewish scriptures, or when quoting Jesus doing so, freely used the Greek translation, implying that Jesus, his Apostles and their followers considered it reliable.[2][21][33]
In the Early Christian Church, the presumption that the Septuagint was translated by Jews before the era of Christ, and that the Septuagint at certain places gives itself more to a christological interpretation than 2nd-century Hebrew texts was taken as evidence that “Jews” had changed the Hebrew text in a way that made them less christological. For example, Irenaeus concerning Isaiah 7:14: The Septuagint clearly writes of a virgin (Greek παρθένος) that shall conceive.[34] While the Hebrew text was, according to Irenaeus, at that time interpreted by Theodotion and Aquila (both proselytes of the Jewish faith) as a young woman that shall conceive. According to Irenaeus, the Ebionites used this to claim that Joseph was the (biological) father of Jesus. From Irenaeus' point of view that was pure heresy, facilitated by (late) anti-Christian alterations of the scripture in Hebrew, as evident by the older, pre-Christian, Septuagint.[35]
When Jerome undertook the revision of the Old Latin translations of the Septuagint, he checked the Septuagint against the Hebrew texts that were then available. He broke with church tradition and translated most of the Old Testament of his Vulgate from Hebrew rather than Greek. His choice was severely criticized by Augustine, his contemporary; a flood of still less moderate criticism came from those who regarded Jerome as a forger. While on the one hand he argued for the superiority of the Hebrew texts in correcting the Septuagint on both philological and theological grounds, on the other, in the context of accusations of heresy against him, Jerome would acknowledge the Septuagint texts as well.[36] With the passage of time, acceptance of Jerome's version gradually increased until it displaced the Old Latin translations of the Septuagint.[20]
The Eastern Orthodox Church still prefers to use the LXX as the basis for translating the Old Testament into other languages. The Eastern Orthodox also use LXX untranslated where Greek is the liturgical language, e.g. in the Orthodox Church of Constantinople, the Church of Greece and the Cypriot Orthodox Church. Critical translations of the Old Testament, while using the Masoretic Text as their basis, consult the Septuagint as well as other versions in an attempt to reconstruct the meaning of the Hebrew text whenever the latter is unclear, undeniably corrupt, or ambiguous.[20] For example, the Jerusalem Bible Foreword says, “… only when this (the Masoretic Text) presents insuperable difficulties have emendations or other versions, such as the … LXX, been used.”[37] The Translator's Preface to the New International Version says: “The translators also consulted the more important early versions (including) the Septuagint … Readings from these versions were occasionally followed where the MT seemed doubtful …”[38]
Textual history[edit]

Table of books[edit]
The Orthodox
Old Testament [5][39][40]Greek-based
nameConventional
English name
Law
ΓένεσιςGénesisGenesis
ἜξοδοςÉxodosExodus
ΛευϊτικόνLeuitikónLeviticus
ἈριθμοίArithmoíNumbers
ΔευτερονόμιονDeuteronómionDeuteronomy
History
Ἰησοῦς NαυῆIêsous NauêJoshua
ΚριταίKritaíJudges
ῬούθRoúthRuth
Βασιλειῶν Αʹ[41]I ReignsI Samuel
Βασιλειῶν ΒʹII ReignsII Samuel
Βασιλειῶν ΓʹIII ReignsI Kings
Βασιλειῶν ΔʹIV ReignsII Kings
Παραλειπομένων ΑʹI Paralipomenon[42]I Chronicles
Παραλειπομένων ΒʹII ParalipomenonII Chronicles
Ἔσδρας ΑʹI Esdras1 Esdras
Ἔσδρας ΒʹII EsdrasEzra-Nehemiah
Τωβίτ[43]TobitTobit or Tobias
ἸουδίθIoudithJudith
ἘσθήρEstherEsther with additions
Μακκαβαίων ΑʹI Makkabees1 Maccabees
Μακκαβαίων ΒʹII Makkabees2 Maccabees
Μακκαβαίων ΓʹIII Makkabees3 Maccabees
Wisdom
Ψ&#945
;λμοίPsalmsPsalms
Ψαλμός ΡΝΑʹPsalm 151Psalm 151
Προσευχὴ ΜανάσσηPrayer of ManassehPrayer of Manasseh
ἸώβIōbJob
ΠαροιμίαιProverbsProverbs
ἘκκλησιαστήςEcclesiastesEcclesiastes
Ἆσμα ἈσμάτωνSong of SongsSong of Solomon or Canticles
Σοφία ΣαλoμῶντοςWisdom of SolomonWisdom
Σοφία Ἰησοῦ ΣειράχWisdom of Jesus the son of SeirachSirach or Ecclesiasticus
Ψαλμοί ΣαλoμῶντοςPsalms of SolomonPsalms of Solomon[44]
Prophets
ΔώδεκαThe TwelveMinor Prophets
Ὡσηέ ΑʹI. OsëeHosea
Ἀμώς ΒʹII. ÄmōsAmos
Μιχαίας ΓʹIII. MichaiasMicah
Ἰωήλ ΔʹIV. IoelJoel
Ὀβδίου Εʹ[45]V. ObdiasObadiah
Ἰωνᾶς Ϛ'VI. IonasJonah
Ναούμ ΖʹVII. NaoumNahum
Ἀμβακούμ ΗʹVIII. AmbakumHabakkuk
Σοφονίας ΘʹIX. SophoniasZephaniah
Ἀγγαῖος ΙʹX. ÄngaiosHaggai
Ζαχαρίας ΙΑʹXI. ZachariasZachariah
Ἄγγελος ΙΒʹXII. MessengerMalachi
ἨσαΐαςHesaiasIsaiah
ἹερεμίαςHieremiasJeremiah
ΒαρούχBaruchBaruch
ΘρῆνοιLamentationsLamentations
Ἐπιστολή ΙερεμίουEpistle of JeremiahLetter of Jeremiah
ἸεζεκιήλIezekiêlEzekiel
ΔανιήλDaniêlDaniel with additions
Appendix
Μακκαβαίων Δ' ΠαράρτημαIV Makkabees4 Maccabees[46]
Textual analysis[edit]

The inter-relationship between various significant ancient manuscripts of the Old Testament (some identified by their siglum). LXX here denotes the original septuagint.
Modern scholarship holds that the LXX was written during the 3rd through 1st centuries BCE. But nearly all attempts at dating specific books, with the exception of the Pentateuch (early- to mid-3rd century BCE), are tentative and without consensus.[8]
Later Jewish revisions and recensions of the Greek against the Hebrew are well attested, the most famous of which include the Three: Aquila (128 CE), Symmachus, and Theodotion. These three, to varying degrees, are more literal renderings of their contemporary Hebrew scriptures as compared to the Old Greek. Modern scholars consider one or more of the 'three' to be totally new Greek versions of the Hebrew Bible.[47]
Around 235 CE, Origen, a Christian scholar in Alexandria, completed the Hexapla, a comprehensive comparison of the ancient versions and Hebrew text side-by-side in six columns, with diacritical markings (a.k.a. “editor's marks”, “critical signs” or “Aristarchian signs”). Much of this work was lost, but several compilations of the fragments are available. In the first column was the contemporary Hebrew, in the second a Greek transliteration of it, then the newer Greek versions each in their own columns. Origen also kept a column for the Old Greek (the Septuagint) and next to it was a critical apparatus combining readings from all the Greek versions with diacritical marks indicating to which version each line (Gr. στἰχος) belonged.[48] Perhaps the voluminous Hexapla was never copied in its entirety, but Origen's combined text (“the fifth column”) was copied frequently, eventually without the editing marks, and the older uncombined text of the LXX was neglected. Thus this combined text became the first major Christian recension of the LXX, often called the Hexaplar recension. In the century following Origen, two other major recensions were identified by Jerome, who attributed these to Lucian and Hesychius.[8]
Manuscripts[edit]
Main article: Septuagint manuscripts
The oldest manuscripts of the LXX include 2nd century BCE fragments of Leviticus and Deuteronomy (Rahlfs nos. 801, 819, and 957), and 1st century BCE fragments of Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy, and the Minor Prophets (Alfred Rahlfs nos. 802, 803, 805, 848, 942, and 943). Relatively complete manuscripts of the LXX postdate the Hexaplar rescension and include the Codex Vaticanus from the 4th century CE and the Codex Alexandrinus of the 5th century. These are indeed the oldest surviving nearly complete manuscripts of the Old Testament in any language; the oldest extant complete Hebrew texts date some 600 years later, from the first half of the 10th century.[20][49] The 4th century Codex Sinaiticus also partially survives, still containing many texts of the Old Testament.[50] While there are differences between these three codices, scholarly consensus today holds that one LXX—that is, the original pre-Christian translation—underlies all three. The various Jewish and later Christian revisions and recensions are largely responsible for the divergence of the codices.[8]
Differences with the Latin Vulgate and the Masoretic text[edit]
The sources of the many differences between the Septuagint, the Latin Vulgate and the Masoretic text have long been discussed by scholars. Following the Renaissance, a common opinion among some humanists was that the LXX translators bungled the translation from the Hebrew and that the LXX became more corrupt with time. The most widely accepted view today is that the original Septuagint provided a reasonably accurate record of an early Hebrew textual variant that differed from the ancestor of the Masoretic text as well as those of the Latin Vulgate, where both of the latter seem to have a more similar textual heritage.
These issues notwithstanding, the text of the LXX is generally close to that of the Masoretes and Vulgate. For example, Genesis 4:1–6 is identical in both the LXX, Vulgate and the Masoretic Text. Likewise, Genesis 4:8 to the end of the chapter is the same. There is only one noticeable difference in that chapter, at 4:7, to wit:
Genesis 4:7, LXX (NETS)
Genesis 4:7, Masoretic and English Translation from MT (Judaica Press)
Genesis 4:7, Latin Vulgate (Douay-Rheims)
If you offer correctly but do not divide correctly, have you not sinned? Be still; his recourse is to you, and you will rule over him.הֲלוֹא אִם תֵּיטִיב שְׂאֵת וְאִם לֹא תֵיטִיב לַפֶּתַח חַטָּאת רֹבֵץ וְאֵלֶיךָ תְּשׁוּקָתוֹ וְאַתָּה תִּמְשָׁל בּוֹ:
Is it not so that if you improve, it will be forgiven you? If you do not improve, however, at the entrance, sin is lying, and to you is its long
ing, but you can rule over it.If thou do well, shalt thou not receive? but if ill, shall not sin forthwith be present at the door? but the lust thereof shall be under thee, and thou shalt have dominion over it.
This instance illustrates the complexity of assessing differences between the LXX and the Masoretic Text as well as the Vulgate. Despite the striking divergence of meaning here between the Septuagint and later texts, nearly identical consonantal Hebrew source texts can be reconstructed. The readily apparent semantic differences result from alternative strategies for interpreting the difficult verse and relate to differences in vowelization and punctuation of the consonantal text.
The differences between the LXX and the MT thus fall into four categories.[51]
Different Hebrew sources for the MT and the LXX. Evidence of this can be found throughout the Old Testament. Most obvious are major differences in Jeremiah and Job, where the LXX is much shorter and chapters appear in different order than in the MT, and Esther where almost one third of the verses in the LXX text have no parallel in the MT. A more subtle example may be found in Isaiah 36.11; the meaning ultimately remains the same, but the choice of words evidences a different text. The MT reads “…al tedaber yehudit be-'ozne ha`am al ha-homa” [speak not the Judean language in the ears of (or—which can be heard by) the people on the wall]. The same verse in the LXX reads according to the translation of Brenton “and speak not to us in the Jewish tongue: and wherefore speakest thou in the ears of the men on the wall.” The MT reads “people” where the LXX reads “men”. This difference is very minor and does not affect the meaning of the verse. Scholars at one time had used discrepancies such as this to claim that the LXX was a poor translation of the Hebrew original. With the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls, variant Hebrew texts of the Bible were found. In fact this verse is found in Qumran (1QIsaa) where the Hebrew word “haanashim” (the men) is found in place of “haam” (the people). This discovery, and others like it, showed that even seemingly minor differences of translation could be the result of variant Hebrew source texts.
Differences in interpretation stemming from the same Hebrew text. A good example is Genesis 4.7, shown above.
Differences as a result of idiomatic translation issues (i.e. a Hebrew idiom may not easily translate into Greek, thus some difference is intentionally or unintentionally imparted). For example, in Psalm 47:10 the MT reads “The shields of the earth belong to God”. The LXX reads “To God are the mighty ones of the earth.” The metaphor “shields” would not have made much sense to a Greek speaker; thus the words “mighty ones” are substituted in order to retain the original meaning.
Transmission changes in Hebrew or Greek (Diverging revisionary/recensional changes and copyist errors)
Dead Sea Scrolls[edit]
The Biblical manuscripts found in Qumran, commonly known as the Dead Sea Scrolls (DSS), have prompted comparisons of the various texts associated with the Hebrew Bible, including the Septuagint.[52] Peter Flint,[53] cites Emanuel Tov, the chief editor of the scrolls,[54] who identifies five broad variation categories of DSS texts:[55]
Proto-Masoretic: This consists of a stable text and numerous and distinctive agreements with the Masoretic Text. About 60% of the Biblical scrolls fall into this category (e.g. 1QIsa-b)
Pre-Septuagint: These are the manuscripts which have distinctive affinities with the Greek Bible. These number only about 5% of the Biblical scrolls, for example, 4QDeut-q, 4QSam-a, and 4QJer-b, 4QJer-d. In addition to these manuscripts, several others share distinctive individual readings with the Septuagint, although they do not fall in this category.
The Qumran “Living Bible”: These are the manuscripts which, according to Tov, were copied in accordance with the “Qumran practice” (i.e. with distinctive long orthography and morphology, frequent errors and corrections, and a free approach to the text. Such scrolls comprise about 20% of the Biblical corpus, including the Great Isaiah Scroll (1QIsa-a):
Pre-Samaritan: These are DSS manuscripts which reflect the textual form found in the Samaritan Pentateuch, although the Samaritan Bible itself is later and contains information not found in these earlier scrolls, (e.g. God's holy mountain at Shechem rather than Jerusalem). The Qumran witnesses – which are characterized by orthographic corrections and harmonizations with parallel texts elsewhere in the Pentateuch – comprise about 5% of the Biblical scrolls. (e.g. 4QpaleoExod-m)
Non-Aligned: This is a category which shows no consistent alignment with any of the other four text-types. These number approximately 10% of the Biblical scrolls, and include 4QDeut-b, 4QDeut-c, 4QDeut-h, 4QIsa-c, and 4QDan-a.[55][56][57]
The textual sources present a variety of readings. For example, Bastiaan Van Elderen [54] compares three variations of Deuteronomy 32:43, the last of the Song of Moses.[58]
Deuteronomy 32.43, Masoretic
Deuteronomy 32.43, Qumran
Deuteronomy 32.43, Septuagint
1 Shout for joy, O nations, with his people
2 For he will avenge the blood of his servants
3 And will render vengeance to his adversaries
4 And will purge his land, his people.
1 Shout for joy, O heavens, with him
2 And worship him, all you divine ones
3 For he will avenge the blood of his sons
4 And he will render vengeance to his adversaries
5 And he will recompense the ones hating him
6 And he purges the land of his people.
1 Shout for joy, O heavens, with him
2 And let all the sons of God worship him
3 Shout for joy, O nations, with his people
4 And let all the angels of God be strong in him
5 Because he avenges the blood of his sons
6 And he will avenge and recompense justice to his enemies
7 And he will recompense the ones hating
8 And the Lord will cleanse the land of his people.
The Dead Sea Scrolls, with their 5% connection to the Septuagint, provide significant information for scholars studying the Greek text of the Hebrew Bible.
Printed editions[edit]
The texts of all printed editions are derived from the three recensions mentioned above, that of Origen, Lucian, or Hesychius.
The editio princeps is the Complutensian Polyglot. It was based on manuscripts that are now lost, but seems to transmit quite early readings.[59]
The Aldine edition (begun by Aldus Manutius) appeared at Venice in 1518. The text is closer to Codex Vaticanus than the Complutensian. The editor says he collated ancient manuscripts but does not specify them. It has been reprinted several times.
The most important edition is the Roman or Sixtine Vulgate, which reproduces the Codex Vaticanus almost exclusively. It was published under the direction of Cardinal Antonio Carafa, with the help of various savants, in 1586, by the authority of Sixtus V, to assist the revisers who were preparing the Latin Vulgate edition ordered by the Council of Trent. It has become the textus receptus of the Greek Old Testament and has had many new editions, such as that of Robert Holmes and James Parsons (Oxford, 1798–1827), the seven editions of Constantin von Tischendorf, which appeared at Leipzig between 1850 and 1887, the last two, published after the death of the author and revised by Nestle, the four editions of Henry Barclay Swete (Cambridge, 1887–95, 1901, 1909), etc.
Grabe's edition was published at Oxford, from 1707 to 1720, and reproduced, but imperfectly, the Codex Alexandrinus of London. For partial editions, see Fulcran Vigouroux, Dictionnaire de la Bible, 1643 sqq.
Alfred Rahlfs, a longtime Septuagint researcher at Göttingen, began a manual edition of the Septuagint in 1917 or 1918. The completed Septuaginta was published in 1935. It relies mainly on Vaticanus, Sinaiticus, and Alexandrinus, and presents a critical apparatus with variants from these and several other sources.[60]
The Göttingen Septuagint (Vetus Testamentum Graecum: Auctoritate Academiae Scient
iarum Gottingensis editum) is a major critical version, comprising multiple volumes published from 1931 to 2009 and not yet complete (the largest missing parts are the history books Joshua through Chronicles except Ruth, and the Solomonic books Proverbs through Song of Songs). Its two critical apparatuses present variant Septuagint readings and variants from other Greek versions.[61]
In 2006, a revision of Alfred Rahlfs's Septuaginta was published by the German Bible Society. This editio altera includes over a thousand changes to the text and apparatus.[62]
Apostolic Bible Polyglot contains a Septuagint text derived mainly from the agreement of any two of the Complutensian Polyglot, the Sixtine, and the Aldine texts.[63]
English translations[edit]
The Septuagint has been translated a few times into English, the first one (though excluding the Apocrypha) being that of Charles Thomson in 1808; his translation was later revised and enlarged by C. A. Muses in 1954.
The translation of Sir Lancelot C. L. Brenton, published in 1851, is a long-time standard. For most of the time since its publication it has been the only one readily available, and has continually been in print. It is based primarily upon the Codex Vaticanus and contains the Greek and English texts in parallel columns. There also is a revision of the Brenton Septuagint available through Stauros Ministries, called The Apostles' Bible, released in January 2008. [2] There is a translation of the Septuagint based on Brenton's English Translation of the Septuagint, called LXX2012: Septuagint in English 2012 that is being developed by the creator of the World English Bible, Michael Paul Johnson. There are separate versions for American spelling and British spelling.
The International Organization for Septuagint and Cognate Studies (IOSCS) has produced A New English Translation of the Septuagint and the Other Greek Translations Traditionally Included Under that Title (NETS), an academic translation based on standard critical editions of the Greek texts. It was published by Oxford University Press in October 2007.
The Apostolic Bible Polyglot, published in 2003, includes the Greek books of the Hebrew canon along with the Greek New Testament, all numerically coded to the AB-Strong numbering system, and set in monotonic orthography. Included in the printed edition is a concordance and index.
The Orthodox Study Bible was released in early 2008 with a new translation of the Septuagint based on the Alfred Rahlfs edition of the Greek text. To this base they brought two additional major sources. First the Brenton translation of the Septuagint from 1851. Second, Thomas Nelson Publishers granted use of the New King James Version text in the places where the translation of the LXX would match that of the Hebrew Masoretic text. This edition includes the New Testament as well, which also uses the New King James Version. It also includes extensive commentary from an Eastern Orthodox perspective.[64]
The Eastern / Greek Orthodox Bible (EOB) is an extensive revision and correction of Brenton’s translation which was primarily based on Codex Vaticanus. Its language and syntax have been modernized and simplified. It also includes extensive introductory material and footnotes featuring significant inter-LXX and LXX/MT variants.
Promotion[edit]

The International Organization for Septuagint and Cognate Studies (IOSCS), a nonprofit, learned society formed to promote international research in and study of the Septuagint and related texts,[65] has established February 8 annually as International Septuagint Day, a day to promote the discipline on campuses and in communities. The Organization is also publishing the “Journal of Septuagint and Cognate Studies” (JSCS).
See also[edit]

Portal iconBible portal
Brenton's English Translation of the Septuagint
Alfred Rahlfs—editor of a commonly distributed critical edition of LXX.
La Bible d'Alexandrie
Documentary hypothesis—discusses the theoretical recensional history of the Torah/Pentateuch in Hebrew.
Tanakh at Qumran—some of the Dead Sea Scrolls are witnesses to the LXX text.
Septuagint manuscripts
Vulgate
Book of Job in Byzantine illuminated manuscripts
Hellenistic Judaism
Manuscripts of Septuagint
Cotton Genesis
Codex Marchalianus
Papyrus Rylands 458 – the oldest manuscript
Papyrus Fouad 266 – the second oldest manuscript
References[edit]

^ “The quotations from the Old Testament found in the New are in the main taken from the Septuagint; and even where the citation is indirect the influence of this version is clearly seen.””Bible Translations – The Septuagint”. JewishEncyclopedia.com. Retrieved 10 February 2012.
^ a b “His quotations from Scripture, which are all taken, directly or from memory, from the Greek version, betray no familiarity with the original Hebrew text (..) Nor is there any indication in Paul's writings or arguments that he had received the rabbinical training ascribed to him by Christian writers (..)””Paul, the Apostle of the Heathen”. JewishEncyclopedia.com. Retrieved 10 February 2012.
^ “[T]he Egyptian papyri, which are abundant for this particular period, … have in a measure reinstated Aristeas (about 200 B.C.) in the opinion of scholars. Upon his “Letter to Philocrates” the tradition as to the origin of the Septuagint rests. It is now believed that even though he may have been mistaken in some points, his facts in general are worthy of credence (Abrahams, in “Jew. Quart. Rev.” xiv. 321). According to Aristeas, the Pentateuch was translated at the time of Philadelphus, the second Ptolemy (285–247 B.C.), which translation was encouraged by the king and welcomed by the Jews of Alexandria. Grätz (“Gesch. der Juden”, 3d ed., iii. 615) stands alone in assigning it to the reign of Philometor (181–146 B.C.). Whatever share the king may have had in the work, it evidently satisfied a pressing need felt by the Jewish community, among whom a knowledge of Hebrew was rapidly waning before the demands of every-day life.””Bible Translations – The Septuagint”. JewishEncyclopedia.com. Retrieved 29 October 2012.
^ Jewish Encyclopedia: Hellenism: Range of Hellenic Influence: “Except in Egypt, Hellenic influence was nowhere stronger than on the eastern shore of the Mediterranean. Greek cities arose there in continuation, or in place, of the older Semitic foundations, and gradually changed the aspect of the country.”
^ a b c Karen H. Jobes and Moises Silva (2001). Invitation to the Septuagint. Paternoster Press. ISBN 1-84227-061-3.
^ Sundberg, in McDonald & Sanders, eds., The Canon Debate, p.72. See Augustine, The City of God, 18.42, where Augustine says that “this name [“Septuaginta”] has now become traditional”, indicating that this was a recent event. But Augustine offers no clue as to which of the possible antecedents led to this development.
^ Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia, for instance.
^ a b c d e f g h Jennifer M. Dines, The Septuagint, Michael A. Knibb, Ed., London: T&T Clark, 2004.
^ Davila, J (2008). “Aristeas to Philocrates”. Summary of lecture by Davila, February 11, 1999. University of St. Andrews, School of Divinity. Retrieved June 19, 2011.
^ Flavius Josephus. Antiquities of the Jews.
^ William Whiston (1998). The Complete Works of Josephus. T. Nelson Publishers. ISBN 0-7852-1426-7.
^ Augustine of Hippo, The City of God 18.42.
^ Tractate Megillah, pages 9a-9b. The Talmud identifies fifteen specific unusual translations made by the scholars, but only two of these translations are found in the extant LXX.
^ “(..) Philo bases his citations from the Bible on the Septuagint version, though he has no scruple about modifying them or citing them with much freedom. Josephus follows this translation closely.””Bible Translations – The Septuagint”. JewishEncyclopedia.com. Retrieved 10 February 2012.
^ J.A.L. Lee, A Lexical Study of the Septuagint Version of the Pentateuch (Septuagint and Cognate Studies, 14. Chico, CA: Scholars Press, 1983; Reprint SBL, 2006)
^ Joel Kalvesma
ki, The Septuagint
^ Life after death: a history of the afterlife in the religions of the West (2004), Anchor Bible Reference Library, Alan F. Segal, p.363
^ Gilles Dorival, Marguerite Harl, and Olivier Munnich, La Bible grecque des Septante: Du judaïsme hellénistique au christianisme ancien (Paris: Cerfs, 1988), p.111
^ a b “[…] die griechische Bibelübersetzung, die einem innerjüdischen Bedürfnis entsprang […] [von den] Rabbinern zuerst gerühmt (..) Später jedoch, als manche ungenaue Übertragung des hebräischen Textes in der Septuaginta und Übersetzungsfehler die Grundlage für hellenistische Irrlehren abgaben, lehnte man die Septuaginta ab.” Verband der Deutschen Juden (Hrsg.), neu hrsg. von Walter Homolka, Walter Jacob, Tovia Ben Chorin: Die Lehren des Judentums nach den Quellen; München, Knesebeck, 1999, Bd.3, S. 43ff
^ a b c d e f Ernst Würthwein, The Text of the Old Testament, trans. Errol F. Rhodes, Grand Rapids, Mich.: Wm. Eerdmans, 1995.
^ a b H. B. Swete, An Introduction to the Old Testament in Greek, revised by R.R. Ottley, 1914; reprint, Peabody, Mass.: Hendrickson, 1989.
^ Hoffman, Book Review, 2004.
^ Paul Joüon, SJ, A Grammar of Biblical Hebrew, trans. and revised by T. Muraoka, vol. I, Rome: Editrice Pontificio Instituto Biblico, 2000.
^ Rick Grant Jones, Various Religious Topics, “Books of the Septuagint”, (Accessed 2006.9.5).
^ “The translation, which shows at times a peculiar ignorance of Hebrew usage, was evidently made from a codex which differed widely in places from the text crystallized by the Masorah.” “Bible Translations – The Septuagint”. JewishEncyclopedia.com. Retrieved 10 February 2012.
^ “Two things, however, rendered the Septuagint unwelcome in the long run to the Jews. Its divergence from the accepted text (afterward called the Masoretic) was too evident; and it therefore could not serve as a basis for theological discussion or for homiletic interpretation. This distrust was accentuated by the fact that it had been adopted as Sacred Scripture by the new faith [Christianity] […] In course of time it came to be the canonical Greek Bible […] It became part of the Bible of the Christian Church.””Bible Translations – The Septuagint”. JewishEncyclopedia.com. Retrieved 10 February 2012.
^ Mishnah Sotah (7:2-4 and 8:1), among many others, discusses the sacredness of Hebrew, as opposed to Aramaic or Greek. This is comparable to the authority claimed for the original arabic Koran according to Islamic teaching. As a result of this teaching, translations of the Torah into Koine Greek by early Jewish Rabbis have survived as rare fragments only.
^ “NETS: Electronic Edition”. Ccat.sas.upenn.edu. 2011-02-11. Retrieved 2012-08-13.
^ a b This article incorporates text from the 1903 Encyclopaedia Biblica article “TEXT AND VERSIONS”, a publication now in the public domain.
^ Greek-speaking Judaism (see also Hellenistic Judaism), survived, however, on a smaller scale into the medieval period. Cf. Natalio Fernández Marcos, The Septuagint in Context: Introduction to the Greek Bible, Leiden: Brill, 2000.
^ “The translation, which shows at times a peculiar ignorance of Hebrew usage, was evidently made from a codex which differed widely in places from the text crystallized by the Masorah (..) Two things, however, rendered the Septuagint unwelcome in the long run to the Jews. Its divergence from the accepted text (afterward called the Masoretic) was too evident; and it therefore could not serve as a basis for theological discussion or for homiletic interpretation. This distrust was accentuated by the fact that it had been adopted as Sacred Scripture by the new faith [Christianity] (..) In course of time it came to be the canonical Greek Bible (..) It became part of the Bible of the Christian Church.””Bible Translations – The Septuagint”. JewishEncyclopedia.com. Retrieved 10 February 2012.
^ St. Jerome, Apology Book II.
^ “The quotations from the Old Testament found in the New are in the main taken from the Septuagint; and even where the citation is indirect the influence of this version is clearly seen (..)””Bible Translations – The Septuagint”. JewishEncyclopedia.com. Retrieved 10 February 2012.
^ Paulkovich, Michael (2012), No Meek Messiah, Spillix Publishing, p. 24, ISBN 0988216116
^ Irenaeus, Against Herecies Book III.
^ Rebenich, S., Jerome (Routledge, 2013), p. 58. ISBN 9781134638444
^ Jerusalem Bible Readers Edition, 1990: London, citing the Standard Edition of 1985
^ “Life Application Bible” (NIV), 1988: Tyndale House Publishers, using “Holy Bible” text, copyright International Bible Society 1973
^ Timothy McLay, The Use of the Septuagint in New Testament Research ISBN 0-8028-6091-5.—The current standard introduction on the NT & LXX.
^ The canon of the original Old Greek LXX is disputed. This table reflects the canon of the Old Testament as used currently in Orthodoxy.
^ Βασιλειῶν (Basileiōn) is the genitive plural of Βασιλεῖα (Basileia).
^ That is, Things set aside from Ἔσδρας Αʹ.
^ also called Τωβείτ or Τωβίθ in some sources.
^ Not in Orthodox Canon, but originally included in the LXX. http://ccat.sas.upenn.edu/nets/edition/
^ Obdiou is genitive from “The vision of Obdias”, which opens the book.
^ Originally placed after 3 Maccabees and before Psalms, but placed in an appendix of the Orthodox Canon
^ Compare Dines, who is certain only of Symmachus being a truly new version, with Würthwein, who considers only Theodotion to be a revision, and even then possibly of an earlier non-LXX version.
^ Jerome, From Jerome, Letter LXXI (404 CE), NPNF1-01. The Confessions and Letters of St. Augustin, with a Sketch of his Life and Work, Phillip Schaff, Ed.
^ Due to the practice of burying Torah scrolls invalidated for use by age, commonly after 300–400 years.
^ Würthwein, op. cit., pp. 73 & 198.
^ See, Jinbachian, Some Semantically Significant Differences Between the Masoretic Text and the Septuagint, [1].
^ “Searching for the Better Text – Biblical Archaeology Society”. Bib-arch.org. Retrieved 2012-08-13.
^ Dr. Peter Flint. Curriculum Vitae. Trinity Western University. Langley, BC, Canada. Accessed March 26, 2011
^ a b Edwin Yamauchi, “Bastiaan Van Elderen, 1924– 2004”, SBL Forum Accessed March 26, 2011.
^ a b Tov, E. 2001. Textual Criticism of the Hebrew Bible (2nd ed.) Assen/Maastricht: Van Gocum; Philadelphia: Fortress Press. As cited in Flint, Peter W. 2002. The Bible and the Dead Sea Scrolls as presented in Bible and computer: the Stellenbosch AIBI-6 Conference: proceedings of the Association internationale Bible et informatique, “From alpha to byte”, University of Stellenbosch, 17–21 July, 2000 Association internationale Bible et informatique. Conference, Johann Cook (ed.) Leiden/Boston BRILL, 2002
^ Laurence Shiffman, Reclaiming the Dead Sea Scrolls, p. 172
^ Note that these percentages are disputed. Other scholars credit the Proto-Masoretic texts with only 40%, and posit larger contributions from Qumran-style and non-aligned texts. The Canon Debate, McDonald & Sanders editors, 2002, chapter 6: Questions of Canon through the Dead Sea Scrolls by James C. VanderKam, page 94, citing private communication with Emanuel Tov on biblical manuscripts: Qumran scribe type c.25%, proto-Masoretic Text c. 40%, pre-Samaritan texts c.5%, texts close to the Hebrew model for the Septuagint c.5% and nonaligned c.25%.
^ Bastiaan Van Elderen. The Dead Sea Scrolls. Appendix 1, p. 8. Accessed March 26, 2011.
^ Joseph Ziegler, “Der griechische Dodekepropheton-Text der Complutenser Polyglotte”, Biblica 25:297–310, cited in Würthwein.
^ Rahlfs, A. (Ed.). (1935/1979). Septuaginta. Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft.
^ IOSCS: Critical Editions of Septuagint/Old Greek Texts
^ German Bible Society
^ Introduction to the Apost
olic Bible
^ “Conciliar Press”. Orthodox Study Bible. Retrieved 2012-08-13.
^ “IOSCS”. Ccat.sas.upenn.edu. Retrieved 2012-08-13.
Further reading[edit]

Bons, Eberhard, and Jan Joosten, eds. Septuagint Vocabulary: Pre-History, Usage, Reception (Society of Biblical Literature; 2011) 211 pages; studies of the language used
Kantor, Mattis, The Jewish time line encyclopedia: A yearby-year history from Creation to the present, Jason Aronson Inc., London, 1992
Alfred Rahlfs, Verzeichnis der griechischen Handschriften des Alten Testaments, für das Septuaginta-Unternehmen, Göttingen 1914.
Makrakis, Apostolos, Proofs of the Authenticity of the Septuagint, trans. by D. Cummings, Chicago, Ill.: Hellenic Christian Educational Society, 1947. N.B.: Published and printed with its own pagination, whether as issued separately or as included together with 2 other works of A. Makrakis in a single volume published by the same film in 1950, wherein the translator's name is identified on the common t.p. to that volume.
W. Emery Barnes, On the Influence of Septuagint on the Peshitta, JTS 1901, pp. 186–197.
Andreas Juckel, Septuaginta and Peshitta Jacob of Edessa quoting the Old Testament in Ms BL Add 17134 JOURNAL OF SYRIAC STUDIES
Martin Hengel, The Septuagint As Christian Scripture, Continuum International Publishing Group, 2004.
Rajak, Tessa, Translation and survival: the Greek Bible of the ancient Jewish Diaspora (Oxford; New York: Oxford University Press, 2009).
Bart D. Ehrman. The New Testament: A Historical Introduction to the Early Christian Writings; 608 pages, Oxford University Press (July, 2011); ISBN 978-0-19-975753-4
Hyam Maccoby. The Mythmaker: Paul and the Invention of Christianity; 238 pages, Barnes & Noble Books (1998); ISBN 978-0-7607-0787-6
External links[edit]

General[edit]
Greek Wikisource has original text related to this article:
The complete Greek text of the modern Septuagint
Wikisource has original text related to this article:
1911 Britannica entry
The Septuagint Online – Comprehensive site with scholarly discussion and links to texts and translations
The Septuagint Institute
Jewish Encyclopedia (1906): Bible Translations
Catholic Encyclopedia (1913): Septuagint Version
Catholic Encyclopedia (1913): Versions of the Bible
Searching for the Better Text: How errors crept into the Bible and what can be done to correct them (Biblical Archaeology Review)
Codex: Resources and Links Relating to the Septuagint
Extensive chronological and canonical list of Early Papyri and Manuscripts of the Septuagint
Chisholm, Hugh, ed. (1911). “Septuagint”. Encyclopædia Britannica (11th ed.). Cambridge University Press
Texts and translations[edit]
Septuagint/Old Greek Texts and Translations LXX finder, listing dozens of editions, both print and digital, in various languages and formats. A good place to start.
Septuagint and New Testament – Despite its name, this site does not in fact provide the LXX, rather a shortened version which eliminates all the LXX books later called “deuterocanonical”. The Greek NT is presented in full. Both Greek texts, the (incomplete) LXX and the NT, have parsing and concordance.
Elpenor's Bilingual (Greek / English) Septuagint Old Testament Greek text (full polytonic unicode version) and English translation side by side. Greek text as used by the Orthodox Churches.
PDF version of the Septuagint (Does not include deuterocanonicals, and lacks diacritical marks)
Titus Text Collection: Vetus Testamentum graece iuxta LXX interpretes (advanced research tool)
Septuagint published by the Church of Greece
Plain text of the whole LXX
Greek-English interlinear of OT & NT. Monotonic orthography.
Bible Resource Pages – contains Septuagint texts (with diacritics) side-by-side with English translations
The Septuagint in Greek as an MS Word document (requires Vusillus Old Face (Archive copy at the Wayback Machine). Introduction and book abbreviations in Latin.)
The Book of Daniel from an Old Greek LXX[dead link] (no diacritics, needs special font)
Sir Lancelot C.L. Brenton's translation
The New English Translation of the Septuagint (NETS), electronic edition
Project to produce an Orthodox Study Bible (OSB) whose Old Testament is based entirely on the Septuagint.[dead link]
EOB: Eastern / Greek Orthodox Bible: includes comprehensive introductory materials dealing with Septuagintal issues and an Old Testament which is an extensive revision of the Brenton with footnotes.
The Septuagint LXX in English (Online text of the entire LXX English translation by Sir Lancelot Brenton)
(Online text of the entire LXX English translation by Sir Lancelot Brenton in PDF)
The Holy Orthodox Bible translated by Peter A. Papoutsis from the Septuagint (LXX) and the Official Greek New Testament text of the Ecumenical Patriarch.
Septuagint LXX – The Septuaginta LXX is an on-going Septuagint project that aims to produce an online critical text of the Septuagint with a comprehensive critical apparatus, and English translation of the Septuagint, Aquila, Theodotion, and Symmachus.
LXX2012: Septuagint in American English 2012 – The Septuagint with Apocrypha, translated from Greek to English by Sir Lancelot C. L. Brenton and published in 1885, with some language updates by Michael Paul Johnson in 2012 (American English)
LXX2012: Septuagint in British/International English 2012 – The Septuagint with Apocrypha, translated from Greek to English by Sir Lancelot C. L. Brenton and published in 1885, with some language updates by Michael Paul Johnson in 2012 (British/International English)
The LXX and the NT[edit]
Septuagint references in NT by John Salza
An Apology for the Septuagint – by Edward William Grinfield
Categories: Early versions of the BibleSeptuagintJudaism-related controversiesChristian biblical canon3rd-century BC worksHellenism and Christianity

Navigation menu
Create accountLog inArticleTalkReadEditView history
Search
Main page
Contents
Featured content
Current events
Random article
Donate to Wikipedia
Wikimedia Shop
Interaction
Help
About Wikipedia
Community portal
Recent changes
Contact page
Tools
Print/export
Languages
العربية
Azərbaycanca
Беларуская
Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎
Български
Boarisch
Català
Čeština
Dansk
Deutsch
Eesti
Ελληνικά
Español
Esperanto
فارسی
Français
Frysk
Galego
한국어
Հայերեն
Hrvatski
Bahasa Indonesia
Interlingua
Íslenska
Italiano
עברית
Basa Jawa
Қазақша
Kinyarwanda
Kiswahili
Latina
Lietuvių
Magyar
മലയാളം
مصرى
Nederlands
日本語
Norsk bokmål
Norsk nynorsk
Plattdüütsch
Polski
Português
Română
Rumantsch
Русский
Scots
Simple English
Slovenčina
Slovenščina
Српски / srpski
Srpskohrvatski / српскохрватски
Suomi
Svenska
Tagalog
தமிழ்
Türkçe
Українська
中文
Edit links
This page was last modified on 13 November 2013 at 13:13.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree t
o the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.
Privacy policyAbout WikipediaDisclaimersContact WikipediaDevelopersMobile viewWikimedia Foundation Powered by MediaWiki

The #1 WORST Food For Your Digestion (Are You Eating It?)

Ever Wonder How Cruise Lines Fill Unsold Cabins? This may surprise you…

The 15 Most Gorgeous Abandoned Place You Will Ever See

Selena Gomez’s Loose Fishtail Braid

3 Business Lessons From Miley Cyrus and Her Infamous Twerk

6 Little Known Foods That Make You Gain Muscle Fast

New York Yankees Should Chase Free-Agent Pitcher Matt Garza

If You Want To Be Awesome At Emails, Add Yesware To Your Gmail Today

[terraricca]

J42

Quote

The Greek Septuagint — some Christians swear by it, and other Christians have never heard of it. It is common for the new-age bible version defenders to call upon the Greek Septuagint in their time of weakness, but as we will demonstrate in this article, the Greek Septuagint never existed.

WHERE DID YOU GOT YOUR INFORMATION

Compositions[edit]from WIKEPEDIA

Legend[edit]
These titles refer to a legendary story, according to which seventy or seventy-two Jewish scholars were asked by the Greek King of Egypt Ptolemy II Philadelphus to translate the Torah from Biblical Hebrew into Greek, for inclusion in the Library of Alexandria.[8] This legend is first found in the pseudepigraphic Letter of Aristeas to his brother Philocrates,[9] and is repeated with embellishments by Philo of Alexandria, Josephus[10][11] and by various later sources, including St. Augustine.[12] A version of the legend is found in the Tractate Megillah of the Babylonian Talmud:
King Ptolemy once gathered 72 Elders. He placed them in 72 chambers, each of them in a separate one, without revealing to them why they were summoned. He entered each one's room and said: “Write for me the Torah of Moshe, your teacher”. God put it in the heart of each one to translate identically as all the others did.[13]
Philo of Alexandria, who relied extensively on the Septuagint,[14] says that the number of scholars was chosen by selecting six scholars from each of the 12 tribes of Israel.
History[edit]
The date of the 3rd century BCE, given in the legend, is confirmed (for the Torah translation) by a number of factors, including the Greek being representative of early Koine, citations beginning as early as the 2nd century BCE, and early manuscripts datable to the 2nd century.[15]
After the Torah, other books were translated over the next two to three centuries. It is not altogether clear which was translated when, or where; some may even have been translated twice, into different versions, and then revised.[16] The quality and style of the different translators also varied considerably from book to book, from the literal to paraphrasing to interpretative.
The translation process of the Septuagint can be broken down into several distinct stages, during which the social milieu of the translators shifted from Hellenistic Judaism to Early Christianity. The translation began in the 3rd century BCE and was completed by 132 BCE,[17][18][19] initially in Alexandria, but in time elsewhere as well.[5]
The Septuagint is the basis for the Old Latin, Slavonic, Syriac, Old Armenian, Old Georgian and Coptic versions of the Christian Old Testament.[20]
Language[edit]
Some sections of the Septuagint may show Semiticisms, or idioms and phrases based on Semitic languages like Hebrew and Aramaic.[21] Other books, such as Daniel and Proverbs, show Greek influence more strongly.[8] Jewish Koine Greek exists primarily as a category of literature, or cultural category, but apart from some distinctive religious vocabulary is not so distinct from other varieties of Koine Greek as to be counted a separate dialect.
The Septuagint is also useful for elucidating pre-Masoretic Hebrew: many proper nouns are spelled out with Greek vowels in the LXX, while contemporary Hebrew texts lacked vowel pointing.[22] One must, however, evaluate such evidence with caution since it is extremely unlikely that all ancient Hebrew sounds had precise Greek equivalents.[23]
Disputes over canonicity[edit]
As the work of translation progressed, the canon of the Greek Bible expanded. The Torah (Pentateuch in Greek) always maintained its pre-eminence as the basis of the canon, but the collection of prophetic writings, based on the Jewish Nevi'im, had various hagiographical works incorporated into it.
In addition some newer books were included in the Septuagint: those called anagignoskomena in Greek, because they are not included in the Jewish canon. Among these are the Maccabees and the Wisdom of Ben Sira. Also, the Septuagint version of some Biblical books, like Daniel and Esther, are longer than those in the Jewish canon.[24] Some of these “apocryphal” books (e.g. the Wisdom of Solomon, and the second book of Maccabees) were not translated, but composed directly in Greek.
It is not known when the Ketuvim (“writings”) or final part of the three part Masoretic Canon was established, although some sort of selective processes must have been employed because the Septuagint did not include other well-known Jewish documents such as Enoch or Jubilees or other writings that are not part of the Jewish canon. (These are now classified as Pseudepigrapha).
Since Late Antiquity, once attributed to a Council of Jamnia, mainstream rabbinic Judaism rejected the Septuagint as valid Jewish scriptural texts. Several reasons have been given for this. First, some mistranslations were claimed. Second, the Hebrew source texts used for the Septuagint differed from the Masoretic tradition of Hebrew texts, which was chosen as canonical by the Jewish rabbis.[25] Third, the rabbis wanted to distinguish their tradition from the newly emerging tradition of Christianity.[19][26] Finally, the rabbis claimed for the Hebrew language a divine authority, in contrast to Aramaic or Greek – even though these languages were the lingua franca of Jews during this period (and Aramaic would eventually be given the same holy language status as Hebrew).[27]
In time the LXX became synonymous with the “Greek Old Testament”, i.e. a Christian canon of writings which incorporated all the books of the Hebrew canon, along with additional texts. The Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox Churches include most of the books that are in the Septuagint in their canons; however, Protestant churches usually do not. After the Protestant Reformation, many Protestant Bibles began to follow the Jewish canon and exclude the additional texts, which came to be called “Apocrypha” (originally meaning “hidden” but became synonymous with “of questionable authenticity”). The Apocrypha are included under a separate heading in the King James Version of the Bible, the basis for the Revised Standard Version.[28]
Final form[edit]
See also Table of books below.
All the books of western canons of the Old Testament are found in the Septuagint, although the order does not always coincide with the Western ordering of the books. The Septuagint order for the Old Testament is evident in the earliest Christian Bibles (4th century).[8]
Some books that are set apart in the Masoretic text are grouped together. For example the Books of Samuel and the Books of Kings are in the LXX one book in four parts called Βασιλειῶν (“Of Reigns”). In LXX, the Books of Chronicles supplement Reigns and it is called Paraleipoménon (Παραλειπομένων—things left out). The Septuagint organizes the minor prophets as twelve parts of one Book of Twelve.[8]
Some scripture of ancient origin are found in the Septuagint but are not present in the Hebrew. These additional books are Tobit, Judith, Wisdom of Solomon, Wisdom of Jesus son of Sirach, Baruch, Letter of Jeremiah (which later became chapter 6 of Baruch in the Vulgate), additions to Daniel (The Prayer of Azarias, the Song of the Three Children, Susanna and Bel and the Dragon), additions to Esther, 1 Maccabees, 2 Maccabees, 3 Maccabees, 4 Maccabees, 1 Esdras, Odes, including the Prayer of Manasseh, the Psalms of Solomon, and Psalm 151.
The canonical acceptance of these books varies among different Christian traditions, and there are canonical books not derived from
the Septuagint. For more information regarding these books, see the articles Biblical apocrypha, Biblical canon, Books of the Bible, and Deuterocanonical books.
Incorporations from Theodotion[edit]
In most ancient copies of the Bible which contain the Septuagint version of the Old Testament, the Book of Daniel is not the original Septuagint version, but instead is a copy of Theodotion's translation from the Hebrew, which more closely resembles the Masoretic text. The Septuagint version was discarded in favour of Theodotion's version in the 2nd to 3rd centuries CE. In Greek-speaking areas, this happened near the end of the 2nd century, and in Latin-speaking areas (at least in North Africa), it occurred in the middle of the 3rd century. History does not record the reason for this, and St. Jerome reports, in the preface to the Vulgate version of Daniel, This thing 'just' happened.[29] One of two Old Greek texts of the Book of Daniel has been recently rediscovered and work is ongoing in reconstructing the original form of the book.[8]
The canonical Ezra-Nehemiah is known in the Septuagint as “Esdras B”, and 1 Esdras is “Esdras A”. 1 Esdras is a very similar text to the books of Ezra-Nehemiah, and the two are widely thought by scholars to be derived from the same original text. It has been proposed, and is thought highly likely by scholars, that “Esdras B” – the canonical Ezra-Nehemiah – is Theodotion's version of this material, and “Esdras A” is the version which was previously in the Septuagint on its own.[29]
Use[edit]

Jewish use[edit]
See also: Development of the Hebrew Bible canon
Starting approximately in the 2nd century CE, several factors led most Jews to abandon use of the LXX. The earliest gentile Christians of necessity used the LXX, as it was at the time the only Greek version of the Bible, and most, if not all, of these early non-Jewish Christians could not read Hebrew. The association of the LXX with a rival religion may have rendered it suspect in the eyes of the newer generation of Jews and Jewish scholars.[20] Instead, Jews used Hebrew/Aramaic Targum manuscripts later compiled by the Masoretes; and authoritative Aramaic translations, such as those of Onkelos and Rabbi Yonathan ben Uziel.[30]
What was perhaps most significant for the LXX, as distinct from other Greek versions, was that the LXX began to lose Jewish sanction after differences between it and contemporary Hebrew scriptures were discovered (see above). Even Greek-speaking Jews tended less to the LXX, preferring other Jewish versions in Greek, such as that of the 2nd-century Aquila translation, which seemed to be more concordant with contemporary Hebrew texts.[20] While Jews have not used the LXX in worship or religious study since the 2nd century CE, recent scholarship has brought renewed interest in it in the field of Judaic Studies.
Christian use[edit]
See also: Development of the Old Testament canon
The Early Christian Church used the Greek texts[31] since Greek was a lingua franca of the Roman Empire at the time, and the language of the Greco-Roman Church (Aramaic was the language of Syriac Christianity, which used the Targums).
The relationship between the apostolic use of the Old Testament, for example, the Septuagint and the now lost Hebrew texts (though to some degree and in some form carried on in Masoretic tradition) is complicated. The Septuagint seems to have been a major source for the Apostles, but it is not the only one. St. Jerome offered, for example, Matt 2:15 and 2:23, John 19:37, John 7:38, 1 Cor. 2:9.[32] as examples not found in the Septuagint, but in Hebrew texts. (Matt 2:23 is not present in current Masoretic tradition either, though according to St. Jerome it was in Isaiah 11:1.) The New Testament writers, when citing the Jewish scriptures, or when quoting Jesus doing so, freely used the Greek translation, implying that Jesus, his Apostles and their followers considered it reliable.[2][21][33]
In the Early Christian Church, the presumption that the Septuagint was translated by Jews before the era of Christ, and that the Septuagint at certain places gives itself more to a christological interpretation than 2nd-century Hebrew texts was taken as evidence that “Jews” had changed the Hebrew text in a way that made them less christological. For example, Irenaeus concerning Isaiah 7:14: The Septuagint clearly writes of a virgin (Greek παρθένος) that shall conceive.[34] While the Hebrew text was, according to Irenaeus, at that time interpreted by Theodotion and Aquila (both proselytes of the Jewish faith) as a young woman that shall conceive. According to Irenaeus, the Ebionites used this to claim that Joseph was the (biological) father of Jesus. From Irenaeus' point of view that was pure heresy, facilitated by (late) anti-Christian alterations of the scripture in Hebrew, as evident by the older, pre-Christian, Septuagint.[35]
When Jerome undertook the revision of the Old Latin translations of the Septuagint, he checked the Septuagint against the Hebrew texts that were then available. He broke with church tradition and translated most of the Old Testament of his Vulgate from Hebrew rather than Greek. His choice was severely criticized by Augustine, his contemporary; a flood of still less moderate criticism came from those who regarded Jerome as a forger. While on the one hand he argued for the superiority of the Hebrew texts in correcting the Septuagint on both philological and theological grounds, on the other, in the context of accusations of heresy against him, Jerome would acknowledge the Septuagint texts as well.[36] With the passage of time, acceptance of Jerome's version gradually increased until it displaced the Old Latin translations of the Septuagint.[20]
The Eastern Orthodox Church still prefers to use the LXX as the basis for translating the Old Testament into other languages. The Eastern Orthodox also use LXX untranslated where Greek is the liturgical language, e.g. in the Orthodox Church of Constantinople, the Church of Greece and the Cypriot Orthodox Church. Critical translations of the Old Testament, while using the Masoretic Text as their basis, consult the Septuagint as well as other versions in an attempt to reconstruct the meaning of the Hebrew text whenever the latter is unclear, undeniably corrupt, or ambiguous.[20] For example, the Jerusalem Bible Foreword says, “… only when this (the Masoretic Text) presents insuperable difficulties have emendations or other versions, such as the … LXX, been used.”[37] The Translator's Preface to the New International Version says: “The translators also consulted the more important early versions (including) the Septuagint … Readings from these versions were occasionally followed where the MT seemed doubtful …”[38]
Textual history[edit]

Table of books[edit]
The Orthodox
Old Testament [5][39][40]Greek-based
nameConventional
English name
Law
ΓένεσιςGénesisGenesis
ἜξοδοςÉxodosExodus
ΛευϊτικόνLeuitikónLeviticus
ἈριθμοίArithmoíNumbers
ΔευτερονόμιονDeuteronómionDeuteronomy
History
Ἰησοῦς NαυῆIêsous NauêJoshua
ΚριταίKritaíJudges
ῬούθRoúthRuth
Βασιλειῶν Αʹ[41]I ReignsI Samuel
Βασιλειῶν ΒʹII ReignsII Samuel
Βασιλειῶν ΓʹIII ReignsI Kings
Βασιλειῶν ΔʹIV ReignsII Kings
Παραλειπομένων ΑʹI Paralipomenon[42]I Chronicles
Παραλει&#96
0;ομένων ΒʹII ParalipomenonII Chronicles
Ἔσδρας ΑʹI Esdras1 Esdras
Ἔσδρας ΒʹII EsdrasEzra-Nehemiah
Τωβίτ[43]TobitTobit or Tobias
ἸουδίθIoudithJudith
ἘσθήρEstherEsther with additions
Μακκαβαίων ΑʹI Makkabees1 Maccabees
Μακκαβαίων ΒʹII Makkabees2 Maccabees
Μακκαβαίων ΓʹIII Makkabees3 Maccabees
Wisdom
ΨαλμοίPsalmsPsalms
Ψαλμός ΡΝΑʹPsalm 151Psalm 151
Προσευχὴ ΜανάσσηPrayer of ManassehPrayer of Manasseh
ἸώβIōbJob
ΠαροιμίαιProverbsProverbs
ἘκκλησιαστήςEcclesiastesEcclesiastes
Ἆσμα ἈσμάτωνSong of SongsSong of Solomon or Canticles
Σοφία ΣαλoμῶντοςWisdom of SolomonWisdom
Σοφία Ἰησοῦ ΣειράχWisdom of Jesus the son of SeirachSirach or Ecclesiasticus
Ψαλμοί ΣαλoμῶντοςPsalms of SolomonPsalms of Solomon[44]
Prophets
ΔώδεκαThe TwelveMinor Prophets
Ὡσηέ ΑʹI. OsëeHosea
Ἀμώς ΒʹII. ÄmōsAmos
Μιχαίας ΓʹIII. MichaiasMicah
Ἰωήλ ΔʹIV. IoelJoel
Ὀβδίου Εʹ[45]V. ObdiasObadiah
Ἰωνᾶς Ϛ'VI. IonasJonah
Ναούμ ΖʹVII. NaoumNahum
Ἀμβακούμ ΗʹVIII. AmbakumHabakkuk
Σοφονίας ΘʹIX. SophoniasZephaniah
Ἀγγαῖος ΙʹX. ÄngaiosHaggai
Ζαχαρίας ΙΑʹXI. ZachariasZachariah
Ἄγγελος ΙΒʹXII. MessengerMalachi
ἨσαΐαςHesaiasIsaiah
ἹερεμίαςHieremiasJeremiah
ΒαρούχBaruchBaruch
ΘρῆνοιLamentationsLamentations
Ἐπιστολή ΙερεμίουEpistle of JeremiahLetter of Jeremiah
ἸεζεκιήλIezekiêlEzekiel
ΔανιήλDaniêlDaniel with additions
Appendix
Μακκαβαίων Δ' ΠαράρτημαIV Makkabees4 Maccabees[46]
Textual analysis[edit]

The inter-relationship between various significant ancient manuscripts of the Old Testament (some identified by their siglum). LXX here denotes the original septuagint.
Modern scholarship holds that the LXX was written during the 3rd through 1st centuries BCE. But nearly all attempts at dating specific books, with the exception of the Pentateuch (early- to mid-3rd century BCE), are tentative and without consensus.[8]
Later Jewish revisions and recensions of the Greek against the Hebrew are well attested, the most famous of which include the Three: Aquila (128 CE), Symmachus, and Theodotion. These three, to varying degrees, are more literal renderings of their contemporary Hebrew scriptures as compared to the Old Greek. Modern scholars consider one or more of the 'three' to be totally new Greek versions of the Hebrew Bible.[47]
Around 235 CE, Origen, a Christian scholar in Alexandria, completed the Hexapla, a comprehensive comparison of the ancient versions and Hebrew text side-by-side in six columns, with diacritical markings (a.k.a. “editor's marks”, “critical signs” or “Aristarchian signs”). Much of this work was lost, but several compilations of the fragments are available. In the first column was the contemporary Hebrew, in the second a Greek transliteration of it, then the newer Greek versions each in their own columns. Origen also kept a column for the Old Greek (the Septuagint) and next to it was a critical apparatus combining readings from all the Greek versions with diacritical marks indicating to which version each line (Gr. στἰχος) belonged.[48] Perhaps the voluminous Hexapla was never copied in its entirety, but Origen's combined text (“the fifth column”) was copied frequently, eventually without the editing marks, and the older uncombined text of the LXX was neglected. Thus this combined text became the first major Christian recension of the LXX, often called the Hexaplar recension. In the century following Origen, two other major recensions were identified by Jerome, who attributed these to Lucian and Hesychius.[8]
Manuscripts[edit]
Main article: Septuagint manuscripts
The oldest manuscripts of the LXX include 2nd century BCE fragments of Leviticus and Deuteronomy (Rahlfs nos. 801, 819, and 957), and 1st century BCE fragments of Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy, and the Minor Prophets (Alfred Rahlfs nos. 802, 803, 805, 848, 942, and 943). Relatively complete manuscripts of the LXX postdate the Hexaplar rescension and include the Codex Vaticanus from the 4th century CE and the Codex Alexandrinus of the 5th century. These are indeed the oldest surviving nearly complete manuscripts of the Old Testament in any language; the oldest extant complete Hebrew texts date some 600 years later, from the first half of the 10th century.[20][49] The 4th century Codex Sinaiticus also partially survives, still containing many texts of the Old Testament.[50] While there are differences between these three codices, scholarly consensus today holds that one LXX—that is, the original pre-Christian translation—underlies all three. The various Jewish and later Christian revisions and recensions are largely responsible for the divergence of the codices.[8]
Differences with the Latin Vulgate and the Masoretic text[edit]
The sources of the many differences between the Septuagint, the Latin Vulgate and the Masoretic text have long been discussed by scholars. Following the Renaissance, a common opinion among some humanists was that the LXX translators bungled the translation from the Hebrew and that the LXX became more corrupt with time. The most widely accepted view today is that the original Septuagint provided a reasonably accurate record of an early Hebrew textual variant that differed from the ancestor of the Masoretic text as well as those of the Latin Vulgate, where both of the latter seem to have a more similar textual heritage.
These issues notwithstanding, the text of the LXX is generally close to that of the Masoretes and Vulgate. For example, Genesis 4:1–6 is identical in both the LXX, Vulgate and the Masoretic Text. Likewise, Genesis 4:8 to the end of the chapter is the same. There is only one noticeable difference in that chapter, at 4:7, to wit:
Genesis 4:7, LXX (NETS)
Genesis 4:7, Masoretic and English Translation from MT (Judaica Press)
Genesis 4:7, Latin Vulgate (Douay-Rheims)
If you offer correctly but do not divide correctly, have you not sinned? Be still; his recourse is to you, and you will rule over him.הֲלוֹא אִם תֵּיטִי&#1489
; שְׂאֵת וְאִם לֹא תֵיטִיב לַפֶּתַח חַטָּאת רֹבֵץ וְאֵלֶיךָ תְּשׁוּקָתוֹ וְאַתָּה תִּמְשָׁל בּוֹ:
Is it not so that if you improve, it will be forgiven you? If you do not improve, however, at the entrance, sin is lying, and to you is its longing, but you can rule over it.If thou do well, shalt thou not receive? but if ill, shall not sin forthwith be present at the door? but the lust thereof shall be under thee, and thou shalt have dominion over it.
This instance illustrates the complexity of assessing differences between the LXX and the Masoretic Text as well as the Vulgate. Despite the striking divergence of meaning here between the Septuagint and later texts, nearly identical consonantal Hebrew source texts can be reconstructed. The readily apparent semantic differences result from alternative strategies for interpreting the difficult verse and relate to differences in vowelization and punctuation of the consonantal text.
The differences between the LXX and the MT thus fall into four categories.[51]
Different Hebrew sources for the MT and the LXX. Evidence of this can be found throughout the Old Testament. Most obvious are major differences in Jeremiah and Job, where the LXX is much shorter and chapters appear in different order than in the MT, and Esther where almost one third of the verses in the LXX text have no parallel in the MT. A more subtle example may be found in Isaiah 36.11; the meaning ultimately remains the same, but the choice of words evidences a different text. The MT reads “…al tedaber yehudit be-'ozne ha`am al ha-homa” [speak not the Judean language in the ears of (or—which can be heard by) the people on the wall]. The same verse in the LXX reads according to the translation of Brenton “and speak not to us in the Jewish tongue: and wherefore speakest thou in the ears of the men on the wall.” The MT reads “people” where the LXX reads “men”. This difference is very minor and does not affect the meaning of the verse. Scholars at one time had used discrepancies such as this to claim that the LXX was a poor translation of the Hebrew original. With the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls, variant Hebrew texts of the Bible were found. In fact this verse is found in Qumran (1QIsaa) where the Hebrew word “haanashim” (the men) is found in place of “haam” (the people). This discovery, and others like it, showed that even seemingly minor differences of translation could be the result of variant Hebrew source texts.
Differences in interpretation stemming from the same Hebrew text. A good example is Genesis 4.7, shown above.
Differences as a result of idiomatic translation issues (i.e. a Hebrew idiom may not easily translate into Greek, thus some difference is intentionally or unintentionally imparted). For example, in Psalm 47:10 the MT reads “The shields of the earth belong to God”. The LXX reads “To God are the mighty ones of the earth.” The metaphor “shields” would not have made much sense to a Greek speaker; thus the words “mighty ones” are substituted in order to retain the original meaning.
Transmission changes in Hebrew or Greek (Diverging revisionary/recensional changes and copyist errors)
Dead Sea Scrolls[edit]
The Biblical manuscripts found in Qumran, commonly known as the Dead Sea Scrolls (DSS), have prompted comparisons of the various texts associated with the Hebrew Bible, including the Septuagint.[52] Peter Flint,[53] cites Emanuel Tov, the chief editor of the scrolls,[54] who identifies five broad variation categories of DSS texts:[55]
Proto-Masoretic: This consists of a stable text and numerous and distinctive agreements with the Masoretic Text. About 60% of the Biblical scrolls fall into this category (e.g. 1QIsa-b)
Pre-Septuagint: These are the manuscripts which have distinctive affinities with the Greek Bible. These number only about 5% of the Biblical scrolls, for example, 4QDeut-q, 4QSam-a, and 4QJer-b, 4QJer-d. In addition to these manuscripts, several others share distinctive individual readings with the Septuagint, although they do not fall in this category.
The Qumran “Living Bible”: These are the manuscripts which, according to Tov, were copied in accordance with the “Qumran practice” (i.e. with distinctive long orthography and morphology, frequent errors and corrections, and a free approach to the text. Such scrolls comprise about 20% of the Biblical corpus, including the Great Isaiah Scroll (1QIsa-a):
Pre-Samaritan: These are DSS manuscripts which reflect the textual form found in the Samaritan Pentateuch, although the Samaritan Bible itself is later and contains information not found in these earlier scrolls, (e.g. God's holy mountain at Shechem rather than Jerusalem). The Qumran witnesses – which are characterized by orthographic corrections and harmonizations with parallel texts elsewhere in the Pentateuch – comprise about 5% of the Biblical scrolls. (e.g. 4QpaleoExod-m)
Non-Aligned: This is a category which shows no consistent alignment with any of the other four text-types. These number approximately 10% of the Biblical scrolls, and include 4QDeut-b, 4QDeut-c, 4QDeut-h, 4QIsa-c, and 4QDan-a.[55][56][57]
The textual sources present a variety of readings. For example, Bastiaan Van Elderen [54] compares three variations of Deuteronomy 32:43, the last of the Song of Moses.[58]
Deuteronomy 32.43, Masoretic
Deuteronomy 32.43, Qumran
Deuteronomy 32.43, Septuagint
1 Shout for joy, O nations, with his people
2 For he will avenge the blood of his servants
3 And will render vengeance to his adversaries
4 And will purge his land, his people.
1 Shout for joy, O heavens, with him
2 And worship him, all you divine ones
3 For he will avenge the blood of his sons
4 And he will render vengeance to his adversaries
5 And he will recompense the ones hating him
6 And he purges the land of his people.
1 Shout for joy, O heavens, with him
2 And let all the sons of God worship him
3 Shout for joy, O nations, with his people
4 And let all the angels of God be strong in him
5 Because he avenges the blood of his sons
6 And he will avenge and recompense justice to his enemies
7 And he will recompense the ones hating
8 And the Lord will cleanse the land of his people.
The Dead Sea Scrolls, with their 5% connection to the Septuagint, provide significant information for scholars studying the Greek text of the Hebrew Bible.
Printed editions[edit]
The texts of all printed editions are derived from the three recensions mentioned above, that of Origen, Lucian, or Hesychius.
The editio princeps is the Complutensian Polyglot. It was based on manuscripts that are now lost, but seems to transmit quite early readings.[59]
The Aldine edition (begun by Aldus Manutius) appeared at Venice in 1518. The text is closer to Codex Vaticanus than the Complutensian. The editor says he collated ancient manuscripts but does not specify them. It has been reprinted several times.
The most important edition is the Roman or Sixtine Vulgate, which reproduces the Codex Vaticanus almost exclusively. It was published under the direction of Cardinal Antonio Carafa, with the help of various savants, in 1586, by the authority of Sixtus V, to assist the revisers who were preparing the Latin Vulgate edition ordered by the Council of Trent. It has become the textus receptus of the Greek Old Testament and has had many new editions, such as that of Robert Holmes and James Parsons (Oxford, 1798–1827), the seven editions of Constantin von Tischendorf, which appeared at Leipzig between 1850 and 1887, the last two, published after the death
of the author and revised by Nestle, the four editions of Henry Barclay Swete (Cambridge, 1887–95, 1901, 1909), etc.
Grabe's edition was published at Oxford, from 1707 to 1720, and reproduced, but imperfectly, the Codex Alexandrinus of London. For partial editions, see Fulcran Vigouroux, Dictionnaire de la Bible, 1643 sqq.
Alfred Rahlfs, a longtime Septuagint researcher at Göttingen, began a manual edition of the Septuagint in 1917 or 1918. The completed Septuaginta was published in 1935. It relies mainly on Vaticanus, Sinaiticus, and Alexandrinus, and presents a critical apparatus with variants from these and several other sources.[60]
The Göttingen Septuagint (Vetus Testamentum Graecum: Auctoritate Academiae Scientiarum Gottingensis editum) is a major critical version, comprising multiple volumes published from 1931 to 2009 and not yet complete (the largest missing parts are the history books Joshua through Chronicles except Ruth, and the Solomonic books Proverbs through Song of Songs). Its two critical apparatuses present variant Septuagint readings and variants from other Greek versions.[61]
In 2006, a revision of Alfred Rahlfs's Septuaginta was published by the German Bible Society. This editio altera includes over a thousand changes to the text and apparatus.[62]
Apostolic Bible Polyglot contains a Septuagint text derived mainly from the agreement of any two of the Complutensian Polyglot, the Sixtine, and the Aldine texts.[63]
English translations[edit]
The Septuagint has been translated a few times into English, the first one (though excluding the Apocrypha) being that of Charles Thomson in 1808; his translation was later revised and enlarged by C. A. Muses in 1954.
The translation of Sir Lancelot C. L. Brenton, published in 1851, is a long-time standard. For most of the time since its publication it has been the only one readily available, and has continually been in print. It is based primarily upon the Codex Vaticanus and contains the Greek and English texts in parallel columns. There also is a revision of the Brenton Septuagint available through Stauros Ministries, called The Apostles' Bible, released in January 2008. [2] There is a translation of the Septuagint based on Brenton's English Translation of the Septuagint, called LXX2012: Septuagint in English 2012 that is being developed by the creator of the World English Bible, Michael Paul Johnson. There are separate versions for American spelling and British spelling.
The International Organization for Septuagint and Cognate Studies (IOSCS) has produced A New English Translation of the Septuagint and the Other Greek Translations Traditionally Included Under that Title (NETS), an academic translation based on standard critical editions of the Greek texts. It was published by Oxford University Press in October 2007.
The Apostolic Bible Polyglot, published in 2003, includes the Greek books of the Hebrew canon along with the Greek New Testament, all numerically coded to the AB-Strong numbering system, and set in monotonic orthography. Included in the printed edition is a concordance and index.
The Orthodox Study Bible was released in early 2008 with a new translation of the Septuagint based on the Alfred Rahlfs edition of the Greek text. To this base they brought two additional major sources. First the Brenton translation of the Septuagint from 1851. Second, Thomas Nelson Publishers granted use of the New King James Version text in the places where the translation of the LXX would match that of the Hebrew Masoretic text. This edition includes the New Testament as well, which also uses the New King James Version. It also includes extensive commentary from an Eastern Orthodox perspective.[64]
The Eastern / Greek Orthodox Bible (EOB) is an extensive revision and correction of Brenton’s translation which was primarily based on Codex Vaticanus. Its language and syntax have been modernized and simplified. It also includes extensive introductory material and footnotes featuring significant inter-LXX and LXX/MT variants.
Promotion[edit]

The International Organization for Septuagint and Cognate Studies (IOSCS), a nonprofit, learned society formed to promote international research in and study of the Septuagint and related texts,[65] has established February 8 annually as International Septuagint Day, a day to promote the discipline on campuses and in communities. The Organization is also publishing the “Journal of Septuagint and Cognate Studies” (JSCS).
See also[edit]

Portal iconBible portal
Brenton's English Translation of the Septuagint
Alfred Rahlfs—editor of a commonly distributed critical edition of LXX.
La Bible d'Alexandrie
Documentary hypothesis—discusses the theoretical recensional history of the Torah/Pentateuch in Hebrew.
Tanakh at Qumran—some of the Dead Sea Scrolls are witnesses to the LXX text.
Septuagint manuscripts
Vulgate
Book of Job in Byzantine illuminated manuscripts
Hellenistic Judaism
Manuscripts of Septuagint
Cotton Genesis
Codex Marchalianus
Papyrus Rylands 458 – the oldest manuscript
Papyrus Fouad 266 – the second oldest manuscript
References[edit]

^ “The quotations from the Old Testament found in the New are in the main taken from the Septuagint; and even where the citation is indirect the influence of this version is clearly seen.””Bible Translations – The Septuagint”. JewishEncyclopedia.com. Retrieved 10 February 2012.
^ a b “His quotations from Scripture, which are all taken, directly or from memory, from the Greek version, betray no familiarity with the original Hebrew text (..) Nor is there any indication in Paul's writings or arguments that he had received the rabbinical training ascribed to him by Christian writers (..)””Paul, the Apostle of the Heathen”. JewishEncyclopedia.com. Retrieved 10 February 2012.
^ “[T]he Egyptian papyri, which are abundant for this particular period, … have in a measure reinstated Aristeas (about 200 B.C.) in the opinion of scholars. Upon his “Letter to Philocrates” the tradition as to the origin of the Septuagint rests. It is now believed that even though he may have been mistaken in some points, his facts in general are worthy of credence (Abrahams, in “Jew. Quart. Rev.” xiv. 321). According to Aristeas, the Pentateuch was translated at the time of Philadelphus, the second Ptolemy (285–247 B.C.), which translation was encouraged by the king and welcomed by the Jews of Alexandria. Grätz (“Gesch. der Juden”, 3d ed., iii. 615) stands alone in assigning it to the reign of Philometor (181–146 B.C.). Whatever share the king may have had in the work, it evidently satisfied a pressing need felt by the Jewish community, among whom a knowledge of Hebrew was rapidly waning before the demands of every-day life.””Bible Translations – The Septuagint”. JewishEncyclopedia.com. Retrieved 29 October 2012.
^ Jewish Encyclopedia: Hellenism: Range of Hellenic Influence: “Except in Egypt, Hellenic influence was nowhere stronger than on the eastern shore of the Mediterranean. Greek cities arose there in continuation, or in place, of the older Semitic foundations, and gradually changed the aspect of the country.”
^ a b c Karen H. Jobes and Moises Silva (2001). Invitation to the Septuagint. Paternoster Press. ISBN 1-84227-061-3.
^ Sundberg, in McDonald & Sanders, eds., The Canon Debate, p.72. See Augustine, The City of God, 18.42, where Augustine says that “this name [“Septuaginta”] has now become traditional”, indicating that this was a recent event. But Augustine offers no clue as to which of the possible antecedents led to this development.
^ Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia, for instance.
^ a b c d e f g h Jennifer M. Dines, The Septuagint, Michael A. Knibb, Ed., London: T&T Clark, 2004.
^ Davila, J (2008). “Aristeas to Philocrates”. Summary of lecture by Davila, February 11, 1999. University of St. Andrews, School of Divinity. Retrieved June 19, 2011.
^ Flavius Josephus. Antiquities of the Jews.
^ William Whiston (1998). The Complete Works of Josephus. T. Nels
on Publishers. ISBN 0-7852-1426-7.
^ Augustine of Hippo, The City of God 18.42.
^ Tractate Megillah, pages 9a-9b. The Talmud identifies fifteen specific unusual translations made by the scholars, but only two of these translations are found in the extant LXX.
^ “(..) Philo bases his citations from the Bible on the Septuagint version, though he has no scruple about modifying them or citing them with much freedom. Josephus follows this translation closely.””Bible Translations – The Septuagint”. JewishEncyclopedia.com. Retrieved 10 February 2012.
^ J.A.L. Lee, A Lexical Study of the Septuagint Version of the Pentateuch (Septuagint and Cognate Studies, 14. Chico, CA: Scholars Press, 1983; Reprint SBL, 2006)
^ Joel Kalvesmaki, The Septuagint
^ Life after death: a history of the afterlife in the religions of the West (2004), Anchor Bible Reference Library, Alan F. Segal, p.363
^ Gilles Dorival, Marguerite Harl, and Olivier Munnich, La Bible grecque des Septante: Du judaïsme hellénistique au christianisme ancien (Paris: Cerfs, 1988), p.111
^ a b “[…] die griechische Bibelübersetzung, die einem innerjüdischen Bedürfnis entsprang […] [von den] Rabbinern zuerst gerühmt (..) Später jedoch, als manche ungenaue Übertragung des hebräischen Textes in der Septuaginta und Übersetzungsfehler die Grundlage für hellenistische Irrlehren abgaben, lehnte man die Septuaginta ab.” Verband der Deutschen Juden (Hrsg.), neu hrsg. von Walter Homolka, Walter Jacob, Tovia Ben Chorin: Die Lehren des Judentums nach den Quellen; München, Knesebeck, 1999, Bd.3, S. 43ff
^ a b c d e f Ernst Würthwein, The Text of the Old Testament, trans. Errol F. Rhodes, Grand Rapids, Mich.: Wm. Eerdmans, 1995.
^ a b H. B. Swete, An Introduction to the Old Testament in Greek, revised by R.R. Ottley, 1914; reprint, Peabody, Mass.: Hendrickson, 1989.
^ Hoffman, Book Review, 2004.
^ Paul Joüon, SJ, A Grammar of Biblical Hebrew, trans. and revised by T. Muraoka, vol. I, Rome: Editrice Pontificio Instituto Biblico, 2000.
^ Rick Grant Jones, Various Religious Topics, “Books of the Septuagint”, (Accessed 2006.9.5).
^ “The translation, which shows at times a peculiar ignorance of Hebrew usage, was evidently made from a codex which differed widely in places from the text crystallized by the Masorah.” “Bible Translations – The Septuagint”. JewishEncyclopedia.com. Retrieved 10 February 2012.
^ “Two things, however, rendered the Septuagint unwelcome in the long run to the Jews. Its divergence from the accepted text (afterward called the Masoretic) was too evident; and it therefore could not serve as a basis for theological discussion or for homiletic interpretation. This distrust was accentuated by the fact that it had been adopted as Sacred Scripture by the new faith [Christianity] […] In course of time it came to be the canonical Greek Bible […] It became part of the Bible of the Christian Church.””Bible Translations – The Septuagint”. JewishEncyclopedia.com. Retrieved 10 February 2012.
^ Mishnah Sotah (7:2-4 and 8:1), among many others, discusses the sacredness of Hebrew, as opposed to Aramaic or Greek. This is comparable to the authority claimed for the original arabic Koran according to Islamic teaching. As a result of this teaching, translations of the Torah into Koine Greek by early Jewish Rabbis have survived as rare fragments only.
^ “NETS: Electronic Edition”. Ccat.sas.upenn.edu. 2011-02-11. Retrieved 2012-08-13.
^ a b This article incorporates text from the 1903 Encyclopaedia Biblica article “TEXT AND VERSIONS”, a publication now in the public domain.
^ Greek-speaking Judaism (see also Hellenistic Judaism), survived, however, on a smaller scale into the medieval period. Cf. Natalio Fernández Marcos, The Septuagint in Context: Introduction to the Greek Bible, Leiden: Brill, 2000.
^ “The translation, which shows at times a peculiar ignorance of Hebrew usage, was evidently made from a codex which differed widely in places from the text crystallized by the Masorah (..) Two things, however, rendered the Septuagint unwelcome in the long run to the Jews. Its divergence from the accepted text (afterward called the Masoretic) was too evident; and it therefore could not serve as a basis for theological discussion or for homiletic interpretation. This distrust was accentuated by the fact that it had been adopted as Sacred Scripture by the new faith [Christianity] (..) In course of time it came to be the canonical Greek Bible (..) It became part of the Bible of the Christian Church.””Bible Translations – The Septuagint”. JewishEncyclopedia.com. Retrieved 10 February 2012.
^ St. Jerome, Apology Book II.
^ “The quotations from the Old Testament found in the New are in the main taken from the Septuagint; and even where the citation is indirect the influence of this version is clearly seen (..)””Bible Translations – The Septuagint”. JewishEncyclopedia.com. Retrieved 10 February 2012.
^ Paulkovich, Michael (2012), No Meek Messiah, Spillix Publishing, p. 24, ISBN 0988216116
^ Irenaeus, Against Herecies Book III.
^ Rebenich, S., Jerome (Routledge, 2013), p. 58. ISBN 9781134638444
^ Jerusalem Bible Readers Edition, 1990: London, citing the Standard Edition of 1985
^ “Life Application Bible” (NIV), 1988: Tyndale House Publishers, using “Holy Bible” text, copyright International Bible Society 1973
^ Timothy McLay, The Use of the Septuagint in New Testament Research ISBN 0-8028-6091-5.—The current standard introduction on the NT & LXX.
^ The canon of the original Old Greek LXX is disputed. This table reflects the canon of the Old Testament as used currently in Orthodoxy.
^ Βασιλειῶν (Basileiōn) is the genitive plural of Βασιλεῖα (Basileia).
^ That is, Things set aside from Ἔσδρας Αʹ.
^ also called Τωβείτ or Τωβίθ in some sources.
^ Not in Orthodox Canon, but originally included in the LXX. http://ccat.sas.upenn.edu/nets/edition/
^ Obdiou is genitive from “The vision of Obdias”, which opens the book.
^ Originally placed after 3 Maccabees and before Psalms, but placed in an appendix of the Orthodox Canon
^ Compare Dines, who is certain only of Symmachus being a truly new version, with Würthwein, who considers only Theodotion to be a revision, and even then possibly of an earlier non-LXX version.
^ Jerome, From Jerome, Letter LXXI (404 CE), NPNF1-01. The Confessions and Letters of St. Augustin, with a Sketch of his Life and Work, Phillip Schaff, Ed.
^ Due to the practice of burying Torah scrolls invalidated for use by age, commonly after 300–400 years.
^ Würthwein, op. cit., pp. 73 & 198.
^ See, Jinbachian, Some Semantically Significant Differences Between the Masoretic Text and the Septuagint, [1].
^ “Searching for the Better Text – Biblical Archaeology Society”. Bib-arch.org. Retrieved 2012-08-13.
^ Dr. Peter Flint. Curriculum Vitae. Trinity Western University. Langley, BC, Canada. Accessed March 26, 2011
^ a b Edwin Yamauchi, “Bastiaan Van Elderen, 1924– 2004”, SBL Forum Accessed March 26, 2011.
^ a b Tov, E. 2001. Textual Criticism of the Hebrew Bible (2nd ed.) Assen/Maastricht: Van Gocum; Philadelphia: Fortress Press. As cited in Flint, Peter W. 2002. The Bible and the Dead Sea Scrolls as presented in Bible and computer: the Stellenbosch AIBI-6 Conference: proceedings of the Association internationale Bible et informatique, “From alpha to byte”, University of Stellenbosch, 17–21 July, 2000 Association internationale Bible et informatique. Conference, Johann Cook (ed.) Leiden/Boston BRILL, 2002
^ Laurence Shiffman, Reclaiming the Dead Sea Scrolls, p. 172
^ Note that these percentages are disputed. Other scholars credit the Proto-Masoretic texts with only 40%, and posit larger contributions from Qumran-style and non-aligned texts. The Canon Debate, McDonald & Sanders editors, 2002, chapte
r 6: Questions of Canon through the Dead Sea Scrolls by James C. VanderKam, page 94, citing private communication with Emanuel Tov on biblical manuscripts: Qumran scribe type c.25%, proto-Masoretic Text c. 40%, pre-Samaritan texts c.5%, texts close to the Hebrew model for the Septuagint c.5% and nonaligned c.25%.
^ Bastiaan Van Elderen. The Dead Sea Scrolls. Appendix 1, p. 8. Accessed March 26, 2011.
^ Joseph Ziegler, “Der griechische Dodekepropheton-Text der Complutenser Polyglotte”, Biblica 25:297–310, cited in Würthwein.
^ Rahlfs, A. (Ed.). (1935/1979). Septuaginta. Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft.
^ IOSCS: Critical Editions of Septuagint/Old Greek Texts
^ German Bible Society
^ Introduction to the Apostolic Bible
^ “Conciliar Press”. Orthodox Study Bible. Retrieved 2012-08-13.
^ “IOSCS”. Ccat.sas.upenn.edu. Retrieved 2012-08-13.
Further reading[edit]

Bons, Eberhard, and Jan Joosten, eds. Septuagint Vocabulary: Pre-History, Usage, Reception (Society of Biblical Literature; 2011) 211 pages; studies of the language used
Kantor, Mattis, The Jewish time line encyclopedia: A yearby-year history from Creation to the present, Jason Aronson Inc., London, 1992
Alfred Rahlfs, Verzeichnis der griechischen Handschriften des Alten Testaments, für das Septuaginta-Unternehmen, Göttingen 1914.
Makrakis, Apostolos, Proofs of the Authenticity of the Septuagint, trans. by D. Cummings, Chicago, Ill.: Hellenic Christian Educational Society, 1947. N.B.: Published and printed with its own pagination, whether as issued separately or as included together with 2 other works of A. Makrakis in a single volume published by the same film in 1950, wherein the translator's name is identified on the common t.p. to that volume.
W. Emery Barnes, On the Influence of Septuagint on the Peshitta, JTS 1901, pp. 186–197.
Andreas Juckel, Septuaginta and Peshitta Jacob of Edessa quoting the Old Testament in Ms BL Add 17134 JOURNAL OF SYRIAC STUDIES
Martin Hengel, The Septuagint As Christian Scripture, Continuum International Publishing Group, 2004.
Rajak, Tessa, Translation and survival: the Greek Bible of the ancient Jewish Diaspora (Oxford; New York: Oxford University Press, 2009).
Bart D. Ehrman. The New Testament: A Historical Introduction to the Early Christian Writings; 608 pages, Oxford University Press (July, 2011); ISBN 978-0-19-975753-4
Hyam Maccoby. The Mythmaker: Paul and the Invention of Christianity; 238 pages, Barnes & Noble Books (1998); ISBN 978-0-7607-0787-6
External links[edit]

General[edit]
Greek Wikisource has original text related to this article:
The complete Greek text of the modern Septuagint
Wikisource has original text related to this article:
1911 Britannica entry
The Septuagint Online – Comprehensive site with scholarly discussion and links to texts and translations
The Septuagint Institute
Jewish Encyclopedia (1906): Bible Translations
Catholic Encyclopedia (1913): Septuagint Version
Catholic Encyclopedia (1913): Versions of the Bible
Searching for the Better Text: How errors crept into the Bible and what can be done to correct them (Biblical Archaeology Review)
Codex: Resources and Links Relating to the Septuagint
Extensive chronological and canonical list of Early Papyri and Manuscripts of the Septuagint
Chisholm, Hugh, ed. (1911). “Septuagint”. Encyclopædia Britannica (11th ed.). Cambridge University Press
Texts and translations[edit]
Septuagint/Old Greek Texts and Translations LXX finder, listing dozens of editions, both print and digital, in various languages and formats. A good place to start.
Septuagint and New Testament – Despite its name, this site does not in fact provide the LXX, rather a shortened version which eliminates all the LXX books later called “deuterocanonical”. The Greek NT is presented in full. Both Greek texts, the (incomplete) LXX and the NT, have parsing and concordance.
Elpenor's Bilingual (Greek / English) Septuagint Old Testament Greek text (full polytonic unicode version) and English translation side by side. Greek text as used by the Orthodox Churches.
PDF version of the Septuagint (Does not include deuterocanonicals, and lacks diacritical marks)
Titus Text Collection: Vetus Testamentum graece iuxta LXX interpretes (advanced research tool)
Septuagint published by the Church of Greece
Plain text of the whole LXX
Greek-English interlinear of OT & NT. Monotonic orthography.
Bible Resource Pages – contains Septuagint texts (with diacritics) side-by-side with English translations
The Septuagint in Greek as an MS Word document (requires Vusillus Old Face (Archive copy at the Wayback Machine). Introduction and book abbreviations in Latin.)
The Book of Daniel from an Old Greek LXX[dead link] (no diacritics, needs special font)
Sir Lancelot C.L. Brenton's translation
The New English Translation of the Septuagint (NETS), electronic edition
Project to produce an Orthodox Study Bible (OSB) whose Old Testament is based entirely on the Septuagint.[dead link]
EOB: Eastern / Greek Orthodox Bible: includes comprehensive introductory materials dealing with Septuagintal issues and an Old Testament which is an extensive revision of the Brenton with footnotes.
The Septuagint LXX in English (Online text of the entire LXX English translation by Sir Lancelot Brenton)
(Online text of the entire LXX English translation by Sir Lancelot Brenton in PDF)
The Holy Orthodox Bible translated by Peter A. Papoutsis from the Septuagint (LXX) and the Official Greek New Testament text of the Ecumenical Patriarch.
Septuagint LXX – The Septuaginta LXX is an on-going Septuagint project that aims to produce an online critical text of the Septuagint with a comprehensive critical apparatus, and English translation of the Septuagint, Aquila, Theodotion, and Symmachus.
LXX2012: Septuagint in American English 2012 – The Septuagint with Apocrypha, translated from Greek to English by Sir Lancelot C. L. Brenton and published in 1885, with some language updates by Michael Paul Johnson in 2012 (American English)
LXX2012: Septuagint in British/International English 2012 – The Septuagint with Apocrypha, translated from Greek to English by Sir Lancelot C. L. Brenton and published in 1885, with some language updates by Michael Paul Johnson in 2012 (British/International English)
The LXX and the NT[edit]
Septuagint references in NT by John Salza
An Apology for the Septuagint – by Edward William Grinfield
Categories: Early versions of the BibleSeptuagintJudaism-related controversiesChristian biblical canon3rd-century BC worksHellenism and Christianity

[terraricca]

FROM; WIKEPEDIA

Masoretic Text
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from Masoretic text)
Part of a series on
The Bible
The Malmesbury Bible
Biblical canons and books[show]
Development and authorship[show]
Translations and manuscripts[show]
Biblical studies[show]
Interpretation[show]
Perspectives[show]
Wikipedia book Bible book Portal icon Bible portal
v t e
The Masoretic Text (MT, 𝕸, or \mathfrak{M}) is the authoritative Hebrew text of the Jewish Bible. While the Masoretic Text defines the books of the Jewish canon, it also defines the precise letter-text of these biblical books, with their vocalization and accentuation known as the Masorah.
The MT is widely used as the basis for translations of the Old Testament in Protestant Bibles, and in recent years (since 1943) also for some Catholic Bibles, although the Eastern Orthodox churches continue to use the Septuagint, as they hold it to be divinely inspired.[1] In modern times the Dead Sea Scrolls have shown the MT to be nearly identical to some texts of the Tanakh dating from 200 BCE but different from others.[2]
The MT was primarily copied, edited and distributed by a group of Jews known as the Masoretes between the 7th and 10th centuries CE. Though the consonants differ little from the text generally accepted in the early 2nd century (and also differ little from some Qumran texts that are even older), it has numerous differences of both greater and lesser significance when compared to (extant 4th century) manuscripts of the Septuagint, a Greek translation (made in the 3rd to 2nd centuries BCE) of the Hebrew Scriptures that was in popular use in Egypt and Israel (and that is often quoted in the New Testament, especially by the Apostle Paul).[3]
The Hebrew word mesorah (מסורה, alt. מסורת) refers to the transmission of a tradition. In a very broad sense it can refer to the entire chain of Jewish tradition (see Oral law), but in reference to the Masoretic Text the word mesorah has a very specific meaning: the diacritic markings of the text of the Hebrew Bible and concise marginal notes in manuscripts (and later printings) of the Hebrew Bible which note textual details, usually about the precise spelling of words.
The oldest extant manuscripts of the Masoretic Text date from approximately the 9th century CE,[4] and the Aleppo Codex (once the oldest complete copy of the Masoretic Text, but now missing its Torah section) dates from the 10th century.

The Nash Papyrus (2nd century BCE) contains a portion of a pre-Masoretic Text, specifically the Ten Commandments and the Shema Yisrael prayer.
Contents [hide]
1 Origin and transmission
1.1 Second Temple period
1.2 Rabbinic period
1.3 The Age of the Masoretes
1.3.1 Ben Asher and ben Naphtali
1.4 The Middle Ages
2 Masorah
2.1 Etymology
2.2 Language and form
2.3 Numerical Masorah
3 Fixing of the text
3.1 Scribal emendations – Tikkune Soferim
3.2 Mikra and ittur
3.3 Suspended letters and dotted words
3.4 Inverted letters
4 History of the Masorah
5 Critical study
6 Some important editions
7 See also
8 References
9 Literature cited
10 External links

[GeneBalthrop]

Journey42………It does appear the Septuagint is on thin Ice , that is one of the reasons i take Pauls advice and compare New Testament Scriptures with the Old Testament and if they do not line with them I will take the OLD Testament as my first choice.  Jesus said plainly, he did not come to destroy the Law or the Prophets.

There is a book written by a Scholar (The misquoted sayings in the new testament)  In fact a scholar i believe named Well's found over 20,000 grammatical error in the New Testament Greek writings. Some things that are in there were not even in the original fragments that were found even complete stories, like the Women caught in Adultery and brought to Jesus, the original found documents don't even have it in them. I believe like Paul said about the Barren's that they searched the scriptures, the (OLD TESTAMENT) is all they had then,  to see if what was said was true is the Best way . IMO

peace and love to you and yours………………………gene

[journey42]

Pierre

Can you explain that all now so everyone can understand?
Do you understand it yourself?
What's your point?.
You've just copied an entire book for us to read, and I'm sure most will not read it.

My post was simple and short,
and clearly explains that the Septuagint has no solid evidence to back it up.
The Levites were the guardians of the old testament.  Not the 12 tribes.
God committed His O.T. words of truth only to the nation of Israel, not to the Greek, the Syrians or the Romans.

So this septuagint existed in the days of Christ and the apostles?  The Hebrew language was still widely used during those times.

[journey42]

Quote (Gene Balthrop @ Nov. 17 2013,03:41)

Journey42………It does appear the Septuagint is on thin Ice , that is one of the reasons i take Pauls advice and compare New Testament Scriptures with the Old Testament and if they do not line with them at will take the OLD Testament as my first choice.  Jesus said plainly, he did not come to destroy the Law or the Prophets. There is a book written by a Scholar (The misquoted sayings in the new testament)  In fact a scholar i believe named Well's found over 20,000 grammatical error in the New Testament Greek writings. Some things that are in there were not even in the original fragments that were found even complete stories, like the Women caught in prostitution and brought to Jesus, the original found documents don't even have it in them. I believe like Paul said about the Barren's that they searched the scriptures, the (OLD TESTAMENT) is all they had then,  to see if what was said was true is the Best way . IMO peace and love to you and yours………………………gene

Thanks Gene. I'm glad you can see it.

[kerwin]

Journey42,

I know your source condemns the Catholic bible which is one of the manuscripts the AKJV is translated from so I doubt you agree with them on that point.

Most translations use the Hebrew Masoretic Text and not the Septuagint from what I have heard. They seem to be a mix.

[terraricca]

Quote (journey42 @ Nov. 16 2013,23:56)

Pierre Can you explain that all now so everyone can understand? Do you understand it yourself? What's your point?. You've just copied an entire book for us to read, and I'm sure most will not read it. My post was simple and short, and clearly explains that the Septuagint has no solid evidence to back it up. The Levites were the guardians of the old testament.  Not the 12 tribes. God committed His O.T. words of truth only to the nation of Israel, not to the Greek, the Syrians or the Romans. So this septuagint existed in the days of Christ and the apostles?  The Hebrew language was still widely used during those times.

j42

if you read it fine, if you don't it is your lose,

I give you a way to see more than your bias view,

[kerwin]

Journey,

Christopher J. E. Johnson writes lousy essays in age when writing essays is something should be ingrained in teachers of the gospel.  He does use quotes and attributes them to their authors which is one better than some that post here.

As far as I can tell he just makes up stuff that his listeners want to hear.  I already pointed he condemned one of the manuscripts that the AKJV used as if he was unaware the AKJV used that manuscript.  

He also accuses the Codex Vaticanus as being “developed by pagan, heretical men who did not believe in the Gospel of Jesus Christ” and gives no supporting evidence.  

He also state it is one of the very few manuscripts used to translate the Catholic bible which is false if he considers the Latin Vulgate the Catholic bible.  The two are significantly different and some difference between modern bible and the AKJV are because the AKJV uses the Latin  Vulgate and modern versions use the Codex Vaticanus.

This first paragraph reveals that the he is just saying stuff and so is either is unlearned and unstable.

The question “Is the Greek Septuagint Real?” seems legit even though he does not.

[mikeboll64]

Hi journey,

The LXX, although being a Greek translation of the Hebrew OT, often worded the scriptures in a way that fit the Greek language better. (Like we often re-word the Hebrew and Greek to make better sense to us in English.)

But the telling thing is that many of the times the NT writers quote scriptures from the OT, they are quoting it as it is phrased in the LXX – not as it is phrased in the Hebrew OT. Many Bibles will list a footnote telling us which OT scripture is being quoted, and many times the footnote has in parenthesis, “See Septuagint”.

That is because the NT writer didn't quote the Hebrew wording, but the Greek LXX wording of that same OT scripture.

Jack once told me that Jesus and the NT writers quoted the LXX 67% of the time – leaving only 33% that they quoted the Hebrew version of the OT.

I can't confirm or deny those figures, but I know that many times the NT writer quoted the LXX version of the OT scripture.

That would be a hard feat to accomplish if there existed no LXX to quote.

[Wakeup]

Quote (mikeboll64 @ Nov. 18 2013,03:25)

Hi journey, The LXX, although being a Greek translation of the Hebrew OT, often worded the scriptures in a way that fit the Greek language better.  (Like we often re-word the Hebrew and Greek to make better sense to us in English.) But the telling thing is that many of the times the NT writers quote scriptures from the OT, they are quoting it as it is phrased in the LXX – not as it is phrased in the Hebrew OT.  Many Bibles will list a footnote telling us which OT scripture is being quoted, and many times the footnote has in parenthesis, “See Septuagint”. That is because the NT writer didn't quote the Hebrew wording, but the Greek LXX wording of that same OT scripture. Jack once told me that Jesus and the NT writers quoted the LXX 67% of the time – leaving only 33% that they quoted the Hebrew version of the OT. I can't confirm or deny those figures, but I know that many times the NT writer quoted the LXX version of the OT scripture. That would be a hard feat to accomplish if there existed no LXX to quote.

Mike B.

I think you should suggest a thorough investigation;
which writers are right and which are wrong.
To solve the matter once and for all.
Then only can one find the truth.

wakeup.

[terraricca]

Quote

I think you should suggest a thorough investigation; which writers are right and which are wrong. To solve the matter once and for all. Then only can one find the truth.

they are all corrupted in some way ;and the true believers let the scriptures them selves correct them

[journey42]

Quote (terraricca @ Nov. 18 2013,10:31)

Quote I think you should suggest a thorough investigation; which writers are right and which are wrong. To solve the matter once and for all. Then only can one find the truth. they are all corrupted in some way ;and the true believers let the scriptures them selves correct them

Pierre

We can't be corrected by the scriptures if our scriptures are perverted. That's like someone giving a faulty road map, we will end up somewhere else.

[kerwin]

Quote (journey42 @ Nov. 18 2013,09:04)

Quote (terraricca @ Nov. 18 2013,10:31) Quote I think you should suggest a thorough investigation; which writers are right and which are wrong. To solve the matter once and for all. Then only can one find the truth. they are all corrupted in some way ;and the true believers let the scriptures them selves correct them Pierre We can't be corrected by the scriptures if our scriptures are perverted.  That's like someone giving a faulty road map, we will end up somewhere else.

Journey,

I don't know about you but I believe there is a God in heaven that does not need Scriptures in order to teach those he want's to hear the truth of the gospel.  

If he chooses to test the hearts of men by allowing flawed versions then he has either left a way to overcome them or will overlook those that are misled by them in their honest attempts to seek his righteousness and his kingdom.

There is a danger in diligently studying Scripture and yet not going to God through Jesus.

Note: Previously, I accidentally dropped not out of the phrase “does not need Scriptures”. Sorry if this confused anyone.

[terraricca]

Quote (kerwin @ Nov. 18 2013,11:23)

Quote (journey42 @ Nov. 18 2013,09:04) Quote (terraricca @ Nov. 18 2013,10:31) Quote I think you should suggest a thorough investigation; which writers are right and which are wrong. To solve the matter once and for all. Then only can one find the truth. they are all corrupted in some way ;and the true believers let the scriptures them selves correct them Pierre We can't be corrected by the scriptures if our scriptures are perverted.  That's like someone giving a faulty road map, we will end up somewhere else. Journey, I don't know about you but I believe there is a God in heaven that does need Scriptures in order to teach those he want's to hear the truth of the gospel.   If he chooses to test the hearts of men by allowing flawed versions then he has either left a way to overcome them or will overlook those that are misled by them in their honest attempts to seek his righteousness and his kingdom. There is a danger in diligently studying Scripture and yet not going to God through Jesus.

Kerwin

Good comment,very close,very close ,

Submission ,obedience ,seek for the kingdom and it's righteousness ,in a humble heart, all to honoring God ,Jehovah,and his son Jesus Christ,

[Wakeup]

Quote (kerwin @ Nov. 18 2013,16:23)

Quote (journey42 @ Nov. 18 2013,09:04) Quote (terraricca @ Nov. 18 2013,10:31) Quote I think you should suggest a thorough investigation; which writers are right and which are wrong. To solve the matter once and for all. Then only can one find the truth. they are all corrupted in some way ;and the true believers let the scriptures them selves correct them Pierre We can't be corrected by the scriptures if our scriptures are perverted.  That's like someone giving a faulty road map, we will end up somewhere else. Journey, I don't know about you but I believe there is a God in heaven that does not need Scriptures in order to teach those he want's to hear the truth of the gospel.   If he chooses to test the hearts of men by allowing flawed versions then he has either left a way to overcome them or will overlook those that are misled by them in their honest attempts to seek his righteousness and his kingdom. There is a danger in diligently studying Scripture and yet not going to God through Jesus. Note: Previously, I accidentally dropped not out of the phrase “does not need Scriptures”. Sorry if this confused anyone.

Kerwin.

Yeah;why would the jews need the old testament.
And we do not need the new testament either.
We just wait for God to teach us verbally.
He will whisper in our ears.
Why would you need to seek the meanings of words, in hebrew and in greek. All a waist of time;just wait for the voice whispering in your ear,and for the dreams.

We just go to some mountain or cave to find inspiration
of the truth. Meditation is one way to find the spirit.
Or just go to your closet(bathroom) to meditate; and inhale deeply.

wakeup.

[terraricca]

Quote

Yeah;why would the jews need the old testament. And we do not need the new testament either. We just wait for God to teach us verbally. He will whisper in our ears. Why would you need to seek the meanings of words, in hebrew and in greek. All a waist of time;just wait for the voice whispering in your ear,and for the dreams. We just go to some mountain or cave to find inspiration of the truth. Meditation is one way to find the spirit. Or just go to your closet(bathroom) to meditate; and inhale deeply.

this shows you have not understood God's ways and the power of the spirit of truth within his written word,

and no man can help you it is all in your own heart and soul and mind ,

[GeneBalthrop]

To All………..My personal relationship with God came by putting Him to the Test of His words, I was not playing games with him, if he had not answered and did what he said he would, i would have not believed in him. All that happened when i had very little understand of the word of God.

I believe the problem with “religious” People today is they simple do not have “REAL PROOF” of the existence of God in their lives, and they are to much  of coward to put God to the test, to see if he is REAL or NOT.

 Paul said this, tell me this He that works miracles among you , does he do it by works of Law of Hearing of your Faith. And therein lies the problem People today do not seek God themselves directly, they do it through organization, and there own scriptural knowledge, but as to if they have a “PERSONAL” relationship with the God they constantly are talking about and arguing over, it's quite another story. You can quote the bible word for word from Genesis to Revelations and not even have any “TRUE” relationship with Him. But those who are called by him can, because God intervenes directly in there lives and responds to them according to his words. While words can take root in the heart and produce thoughts in our minds, and even cause us to change our thinking.

It still is up to God to give us that “PERSONAL” relationship with Him in our lives, and we all need to seek Him through Prayer for it, with great expectation looking for his answers. If he doesn't give you an answer then he just is not dealing with you, at this time, IMO. What is REAL is REAL what is FALSE is FALSE and arguing over different text is pure foolishness, I have come to see over these many years here, those who have the TRUTH had it already and Those who have Not the truth simply Don't have it , it is not about Head knowledge it is about relationship, for God looks on the Heart of a person, and Knows the mind of those that LOVE and seek the TRUTH.

Another point to consider Hardly no one had any bibles from Abraham to the modern Printing press, all those faithful people in time past walked by a Faithful relationship with God, and it must be the same today in order for a real relationship with God to exist.

Jesus plainly said, When the “Son of Man” comes, will he find “FAITH” on the earth? I doubt it, even though everyone has probably several bibles in their homes. I don't think i have heard of anyone here ever telling us about their personal experiences with God, or any Prayers that he personally answered, in about ten years that i have been here.

Yet all claim they are of the Faith, but produce no proof through by their testimony or even talk about what they Know the ONE and ONLY TRUE God has done in their lives, and that is Just amazing to me seeing all think they are in contact with God the FATHER. IMO

peace and love to you all………………………….gene

[kerwin]

Quote (Wakeup @ Nov. 18 2013,17:49)

Quote (kerwin @ Nov. 18 2013,16:23) Quote (journey42 @ Nov. 18 2013,09:04) Quote (terraricca @ Nov. 18 2013,10:31) Quote I think you should suggest a thorough investigation; which writers are right and which are wrong. To solve the matter once and for all. Then only can one find the truth. they are all corrupted in some way ;and the true believers let the scriptures them selves correct them Pierre We can't be corrected by the scriptures if our scriptures are perverted.  That's like someone giving a faulty road map, we will end up somewhere else. Journey, I don't know about you but I believe there is a God in heaven that does not need Scriptures in order to teach those he want's to hear the truth of the gospel.   If he chooses to test the hearts of men by allowing flawed versions then he has either left a way to overcome them or will overlook those that are misled by them in their honest attempts to seek his righteousness and his kingdom. There is a danger in diligently studying Scripture and yet not going to God through Jesus. Note: Previously, I accidentally dropped not out of the phrase “does not need Scriptures”. Sorry if this confused anyone. Kerwin. Yeah;why would the jews need the old testament. And we do not need the new testament either. We just wait for God to teach us verbally. He will whisper in our ears. Why would you need to seek the meanings of words, in hebrew and in greek. All a waist of time;just wait for the voice whispering in your ear,and for the dreams. We just go to some mountain or cave to find inspiration of the truth. Meditation is one way to find the spirit. Or just go to your closet(bathroom) to meditate; and inhale deeply. wakeup.

Wakeup,

God uses the tools he chooses to whether or not he has to.  If he want to whisper in someones ear then I am not fool enough to say no.

He certainly must do something as no one can go to Jesus unless God draws them no matter how much they read Scripture.

If God chooses to let Scriptures be flawed then who am tell him no.  He does what he will and it is righteous.  All I know is every translation I know of was translated by heretics.  They are false teachers.  The fact there are flaws does not bother me but rather I am amazed their number is so low.  My hypothesis is that the church is still hiding in her place.

God does an excellent job correcting me with Scriptures and in other ways.

[Author]

Posts