Did Jesus quote from the LXX?

[tall73]

Like many I do not know all the facts concerning the manuscripts that contain the LXX. I know that I am overly skeptical, but that is mainly the result of research into the Codex Sinaiticus and its association with the Vaticanus.

Research into the syntax is one thing, the research into the history is another.

Here is a selection from a letter from Jerome to Pope Damasus where he references the LXX translation, present in his day.

The purpose of the letter is to indicate he is going to correct the Latin of the gospel translations then current. In clarifying the extent of his then planned work he notes that he is not speaking of the Old Testament LXX, but only of the gospels for this project. Later of course he translated much more, and eventually switched the underlying Old Testament text to Hebrew.

Note that he also indicates in passing that the New Testament besides Matthew's gospel originally, was composed in Greek.


Jerome's Letter to Pope Damasus: Preface to the Gospels - Wikisource, the free online library

If, however, truth is to be a seeking among many, why do we not now return to the Greek originals to correct those mistakes which either through faulty translators were set forth, or through confident but unskilled were wrongly revised, or through sleeping scribes either were added or were changed? Certainly, I do not discuss the Old Testament, which came from the Seventy Elders in the Greek language, changing in three steps until it arrived with us[1]. Nor do I seek what Aquila, or what Symmachus may think, or why Theodotion may walk the middle of the road between old and new. This may be the true translation which the Apostles have approved. I now speak of the New Testament, which is undoubtedly Greek, except the Apostle Matthew, who had first set forth the Gospel of Christ in Hebrew letters in Judea. This (Testament) certainly differs in our language, and is led in the way of different streams; it is necessary to seek the single fountainhead. I pass over those books which are called by the name of Lucian and Hesychius, for which a few men wrongly claim authority, who anyway were not allowed to revise either in the Old Instrument after the Seventy Translators, or to pour out revisions in the New; with the Scriptures previously translated into the languages of many nations, the additions may now be shown to be false. Therefore, this present little preface promises only the four Gospels, the order of which is Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, revised in comparison with only old Greek books. They do not disagree with many familiar Latin readings, as we have kept our pen in control, but only those in which the sense will have been seen to have changed (from the Greek) are corrected; the rest remain as they have been.

The changing of three steps in which the LXX came to them in Latin may refer to 1. Hebrew translated to 2. Greek, and then 3. Latin.

So we have here not only a reference to the LXX, and its original creation account from legend, but also a note that it was already translated into Latin.

 

[tall73]

What part does the Church's acceptance of Scripture play?

And now we come full circle back to the topic of the thread. If the inspired New Testament writings quote it frequently, what more acceptance of it could there be?

And for this reason the Greek church continued to use it down through history. They are the same church that held on to the majority text, not the Alexandrian text that became so important for the critical text.

So if you value their judgment in the New Testament, you may want to consider it in their use of the Greek Old Testament. Especially in light of the quotations.

Now it is true, not all quotations follow the LXX. A smaller portion follow the Hebrew, and some follow neither.

And there are apparently some readings in the Dead Sea Scrolls that are LXX like readings, but in Hebrew, and there are some that are somewhat different than both, though as you noted, most follow the Masoretic.

The existence of readings in Hebrew that follow the LXX indicates what some have thought now for a while, that the LXX may not be as far from the Hebrew as some originally thought, but may represent a different underlying Hebrew text.

If this is the case then certainly the Spirit could include the correct reading in each case in NT quotes.

By the way, an interesting translation that recently came out is the Modern English Version. It uses the Textus Receptus type text in the New Testament, And it uses the Hebrew in the Old. However, in cases where the New Testament follows the Septuagint it corrects the Hebrew Old Testament with the LXX reading.

For those wanting a translation with updated language from the KJV, but still want the underlying text that they prefer, it may be a good option. I have read limited amounts so far. You can find the translation on Bible Gateway.

 

[tall73]

Am I critical skeptic? Yes, but don't I have a reason?
Do I believe Jesus quoted from the LXX? First I would have to trust the people presenting the evidence. Those people said all the New Testament books were written in Greek, I don't believe it. They said the Jews didn't speak Hebrew during the first Century. Thanks to the DSS and Josephus I don't believe it. The known older manuscript DSS aligns itself with the Masoretic Text far better than it does with the LXX.

The fact that Paul said the oracles of God were committed to the Jews.

Well how much do you believe Jerome who you quoted earlier as an authority? While he acknowledges that Matthew was not first written in Greek, he indicates all the rest were.

I now speak of the New Testament, which is undoubtedly Greek, except the Apostle Matthew, who had first set forth the Gospel of Christ in Hebrew letters in Judea.
Letter from Jerome to Pope Damasus.

The same is true of Epiphanius:

Epiphanius is of the same opinion; he states in his Panarion that Matthew alone expounded and declared the gospel in Hebrew among the New Testament writers: "For in truth, Matthew alone of the New Testament writers expounded and declared the Gospel in Hebrew using Hebrew script." (Panarion 30.3.7)

So we can be pretty sure that all but Matthew were in Greek. And Jerome presents additional evidence regarding the LXX.

 

[yeshuasavedme]

Jews for the most part read Greek, if they read. That's why the LXX was produced in the first place -- most Jews could not read the Scriptures in Hebrew...

That is not the reason the Hebrew Scriptures were translated into Greek. They were translated to Greek for the library at Alexandria to have a copy of them, as recorded by Ireneaus, quoted here by Eusebius, in Book 5 chapter 8:

Shortly after he adds:

For before the Romans had established their empire, while the Macedonians were still holding Asia, Ptolemy, the son of Lagus, being desirous of adorning the library which he had founded in Alexandria with the meritorious writings of all men, requested the people of Jerusalem to have their Scriptures translated into the Greek language.

12. But, as they were then subject to the Macedonians, they sent to Ptolemy seventy elders, who were the most skilled among them in the Scriptures and in both languages. Thus God accomplished his purpose.

13. But wishing to try them individually, as he feared lest, by taking counsel together, they might conceal the truth of the Scriptures by their interpretation, he separated them from one another, and commanded all of them to write the same translation. He did this for all the books.

14. But when they came together in the presence of Ptolemy, and compared their several translations, God was glorified, and the Scriptures were recognized as truly divine. For all of them had rendered the same things in the same words and with the same names from beginning to end, so that the heathen perceived that the Scriptures had been translated by the inspiration of God.

The scribes who translated the Hebrew to Greek did it for Ptolemy, for the library at Alexandria, and were brought from Jerusalem, where Hebrew was their language, to do so.

 

[Architeuthus]

That is not the reason the Hebrew Scriptures were translated into Greek.

Yes it was, actually. In spite of the myth of the 70 translators, most of the LXX was translated after Ptolemy's time.

To quote the Jewish Encyclopedia:

The oldest and most important of all the versions made by Jews is that called "The Septuagint." It is a monument of the Greek spoken by the large and important Jewish community of Alexandria ... 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. ... 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. It is not known when the other books of the Bible were rendered into Greek. The grandson of Ben Sira (132 B.C.), in the prologue to his translation of his grandfather's work, speaks of the "Law, Prophets, and the rest of the books" as being already current in his day. ... The large number of Greek-speaking Jewish communities in Palestine, Syria, Mesopotamia, Asia Minor, and northern Africa must have facilitated its spread in all these regions. 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. This will also explain in a measure the undoubted influence of the Septuagint upon the Syriac translation called the "Peshiṭta." ... It is the version used by the Jewish Hellenistic writers, Demetrius, Eupolemus, Artabanus, Aristeas, Ezekiel, and Aristobulus, as well as in the Book of Wisdom, the translation of Ben Sira, and the Jewish Sibyllines. Hornemann, Siegfried, and Ryle have shown that 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.

and

It is reported that in Asia Minor R. Meïr was unable to find a Megillah written in Hebrew; and the weekly lessons both from the Law and the Prophets were at an early date read in Greek in Alexandria. This makes comprehensible the statement that "the Law can be read in any language." ... At a later time—perhaps in the second century ofthe present era—a different view seems to have prevailed; and it was said that the day on which the Law was translated into Greek was as unfortunate for the Jews as that on which the Golden Calf was made. ... Evidently this change of view was occasioned by the rise of the Christian Church, which used the Bible only in the Septuagint Version.

Please do some research before making pronouncements on this topic.

 

[yeshuasavedme]

...

To quote the Jewish Encyclopedia:

My research is from credible sources. Josephus, Irenaeus, Eusebius, Philo, and such like.
Men who were closer to the times than your early 20th century source.
You have your bias' and I have mine.
I think mine are more sound, based on a better foundation than yours.
In Christ,
YSM

 

[Architeuthus]

My research is from credible sources. Josephus, Irenaeus, Eusebius, Philo, and such like.

I think you're misunderstanding what those gentlemen say. Josephus and Philo, after all, wrote in Greek and quoted the LXX.

 

[yeshuasavedme]

I think you're misunderstanding what those gentlemen say. Josephus and Philo, after all, wrote in Greek and quoted the LXX.

Josephus also wrote in Hebrew.
In Antiquities 12:2, Josephus tells of the translation of the Hebrew Law into the Greek, commissioned by Ptolemy Philadelphus for his library at Alexendria.


Josephus told this, in Against Apion, 2:4"
And for his successor Ptolemy, who was called Philadelphus, he did not only set all those of our nation free who were captives under him, but did frequently give money [for their ransom]; and, what was his greatest work of all, he had a great desire of knowing our laws, and of obtaining the books of our sacred Scriptures; accordingly, he desired that such men might be sent him as might interpret our law to him; and, in order to have them well compiled, he committed that care to no ordinary persons, but ordained that Demetrius Phalereus, and Andreas, and Aristeas; the first, Demetrius, the most learned person of his age, and the others, such as were intrusted with the guard of his body; should take care of this matter: nor would he certainly have been so desirous of learning our law, and the philosophy of our nation, had he despised the men that made use of it, or had he not indeed had them in great admiration.

Antiquities 12:2
15. And when the king had received these books from Demetrius, as we have said already, he adored them, and gave order that great care should be taken of them, that they might remain uncorrupted. He also desired that the interpreters would come often to him out of Judea, and that both on account of the respects that he would pay them, and on account of the presents he would make them; for he said it was now but just to send them away, although if, of their own accord, they would come to him hereafter, they should obtain all that their own wisdom might justly require, and what his generosity was able to give them. So he then sent them away, and gave to every one of them three garments of the best sort, and two talents of gold, and a cup of the value of one talent, and the furniture of the room wherein they were feasted. And these were the things he presented to them. But by them he sent to Eleazar the high priest ten beds, with feet of silver, and the furniture to them belonging, and a cup of the value of thirty talents; and besides these, ten garments, and purple, and a very beautiful crown, and a hundred pieces of the finest woven linen; as also vials and dishes, and vessels for pouring, and two golden cisterns to be dedicated to God. He also desired him, by an epistle, that he would give these interpreters leave, if any of them were desirous of coming to him, because he highly valued a conversation with men of such learning, and should be very willing to lay out his wealth upon such men. And this was what came to the Jews, and was much to their glory and honor, from Ptolemy Philadelphus.

 

[Architeuthus]

Josephus also wrote in Hebrew.

I think you mean Aramaic.

And given Josephus' goals in writing, he may not be as reliable as you think.

 

[tall73]

12. In my youth when the desert walled me in with its solitude I was still unable to endure the promptings of sin and the natural heat of my blood; and, although I tried by frequent fasts to break the force of both, my mind still surged with [evil] thoughts.3453 To subdue its turbulence I betook myself to a brother who before his conversion had been a Jew and asked him to teach me Hebrew. Thus, after having familiarised myself with the pointedness of Quintilian, the fluency of Cicero, the seriousness of Fronto and the gentleness of Pliny, I began to learn my letters anew and to study to pronounce words both harsh and guttural. What labour I spent upon this task, what difficulties I went through, how often I despaired, how often I gave over and then in my eagerness to learn commenced again, can be attested both by myself the subject of this misery and by those who then lived with me. But I thank the Lord that from this seed of learning sown in bitterness I now cull sweet fruits. Letter CXXV. Jerome To Rustics.

Yet Jerome learned Hebrew from a Jewish convert, so perhaps more still spoke it than thought.

 

[Architeuthus]

Yet Jerome learned Hebrew from a Jewish convert, so perhaps more still spoke it than thought.

By Jerome's time the non-Christian Jewish community was using Hebrew a lot more than they had in the 1st century.