The Septaguint... .

[David333]

Am I right in thinking that the "Bible that Jesus read" would be the Septaguint, i.e. the Greek translation of the Jewish Scriptures?

Is it possible to search this online? At studylight.org and blueletterbible I can search the Greek of the New Testament, but I can't seem to search the Greek of the Old Testament! Can anyone help?

 

[daveleau]

The best thing to do is to check out some books on Christian history at the local library regarding the first question. I have read some that say the religious language of the temple was Greek. I have heard others say that the people still looked to the Hebrew for discussion and that the Greek was left for official business.

I am not familiar with searchable Greek online, but you can download and install e-sword, which is a free Bible study software, which has several searchable Greek versions, including the Septuagint.

Ah, my old friend Google helped out with the searchable Spetuagint:
http://faculty.bbc.edu/rdecker/lxx.htm
Control+F is the search function for Internet Explorer.

God bless,
Dave

 

[prodromos]

The Septuagint in the New Testament

 

[David333]

Thanks to both of you for all of the information. I shall look through the websites. Any idea what's e-sword like? I shall probably download it when I get home. Would you recommend it?

 

[daveleau]

I'd recommend it highly. I have so much information at my fingertips with e-sword. No problems so far. Tons of books and commentaries and Bible versions.

God bless,
Dave

 

[ClementofRome]

prodromos, that is one excellent site.

Thanks for posting it.
CofR

 

[prodromos]

prodromos, that is one excellent site.

It's been in my bookmarks since someone else posted it in another thread a few weeks back. I sure can't claim credit for finding it

 

[Peter A.V.]

Am I right in thinking that the "Bible that Jesus read" would be the Septaguint, i.e. the Greek translation of the Jewish Scriptures?QUOTE]
.........................................................
No,David333,you would not be right.To start with,the LXX[72]never came out till 250AD pumped out by the heretic Origen.The LXX[72]is his 5th column.The LXX[72 was never ONLY aGreek translation of the Hebrew scriptures for it includes the New Testament.Plus it includes The Apocaphal books as PART of the connon of scriptures.But the King James had the apocrapha in between the scriptures,just like Scofield's notes.The LXX is the most corrupted work around this planet with whole sections of the Bible taken out including several Books of both the new and old testaments.Then they also add garbage In the New Testament like The shepherd of Hermes,and the Epistle of Barnabus.
They teach to give yourself over to the beast and to take the NAME of the Beast.Real trustworthy junk there.Nothing but a trashbin version.And this is what the modern versions claim to be the best?
HA!HA!HA! ho!hooooweee!WHAT A LOAD OF BUNK.KJV is the Standard.

 

[Peter A.V.]

I knew you would end up quoting your UBS corruptions eventually here.you just couldn't resist.
I've had the helps for translators for over a decade 'OLD TESTAMENT QUOTATIONS in the NEW TESTAMENT' by UBS 1967,Revised Edition
They use the 1881 RV
They lie on the very first one.Mt1:23/Isa7:14.
RV;Behold,the virgin shall be with child,and shall bring forth a son,and they shall call his name Immanuel.
LXX Isa7:14 Behold,the virgin shall be with child,and shall bring forth a son,and thou shalt call his name Immanuel.
MT Behold,a young woman shall conceive,and bear a son,and shall call his name Immanuel.
Your web site referal;
"Behold,a virgin shall concieve and bear a son,and his name shall be called Emmanuel"[which means,God with us].NT/LXX
Behold,a young woman shall conceive and bear a son,and shall call his name Immanuel.OT/MAS...If you just read,you can see discrepancies in their own
LXX.From the virgin to a virgin.Be with child ,is gone.thou shalt call to shall be called.Immanuel to Emmanuel.
Now this is just from the very first sample that they give.They are given to CHANGE.And now I will show that they are given to lies also.
I just happen to have a couple Masorietic texts on my bookshelf;now let's see the truth of the matter.
NEW TESTAMENT Mt 1:23;Behold,the virgin in womb will conceive and will bear a son,and they will call the name of Him Emmanuel,which is ,being translated.with us God.Interlinear
Literal translation;"Behold!The virgin will conceive in her womb,and will bear a son;and they will call his name Emmanuel",which translated is,God with us.NT
MASORETIC OT.Interlinear;Therefore shall the LORD give to Himself you a sign,behold,the virgin will conceive and bear a son,and she will call his name Immanuel.
OT literal MAS.So,The LORD HImself will give you a sign:Behold!The virgin is with child,and shall bring forth a son;ansd she shall call his name Immanuel.
KJV;Therefore the LORD himself shall give you a sign;Behold,a virgin shall conceive,and bear a son,and shall call his name Immanuel.
As you can see plainly,the King james and the Masoretic text has the word virgin.UBS lied as usual.

 

[ClementofRome]

Peter AV, I must take exception to what you have there.

Clement of Rome, a devout Christian, writing in 96 AD, to the Corinthian church uses the LXX exclusively. To suggest that Origen introduced the Septuagint is patently incorrect.

I will leave the inaccuracies with that.

 

[Theophorus]

.........................................................
No,David333,you would not be right.To start with,the LXX[72]never came out till 250AD pumped out by the heretic Origen

That is facinating, but untrue. For proof look at psalm 22 where in the King James version it says "they have pierced my hands and my feet". The KJV translators elected to go with the LXX in that case over the masoretic. The masoretic has "like a lion" or some other silliness, that is translated as:

My hands and feet have shriveled
They have bound me hand and foot
so wasted are my hands and feet
as if to hack off my hands and feet

When they found they dead see scrolls they found psalm 22, and guess what the hebrew says; they have pierced my hands and my feet. So which is more reliable in that case, using some of the criteria of Wescott and Hort. Your Origen conspiracy theory is just that.

 

[mathethes]

in Luke 4:18-19 would have been one of the Jewish scrolls of Isaiah. It would have been in Hebrew. But in the retelling of it, Luke used the words from the Septuagint, because it was the available bible he was using.
The Lord didn't have a bible of his own. He used to go to the synagogue and it was there where he got his weekly dose of God's word. If you would notice, the Lord can stand on his own against the experts of the Law. This was because they had very good memories at the time. I guess, any intelligent synagogue goer would have been able to discuss scriptures from memory. Joseph, the foster father of Jesus would have taught him about God, faith and the value of work from scriptures that he had heard (not necessarily read) memorized and reflected on.

 

[mathethes]

So which is more reliable in that case, using some of the criteria of Wescott and Hort. Your Origen conspiracy theory is just that.

I would tend to agree with Theophorus here. The Septuagint is actually a very reliable translation of a Hebrew text or texts that is more original than the Hebrew Massoretic text now being used. It is for this reason that even biblical scholars would study both the Septuagint and the Massora side by side. In addition, the Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia being used now was "re-constructed" with the aid of the Septuagint.

 

[Bethshaya]

The question really is: Did Jesus read the bible (scripture) or did he already know it because he wrote it?

He likely said, what he said because it was a quote of what he had said. Leave it at that.

 

[2Timothy2]

Thanks to both of you for all of the information. I shall look through the websites. Any idea what's e-sword like? I shall probably download it when I get home. Would you recommend it?

I have the LXX on e-Sword. It's very helpful.

 

[amorosi]

Am I right in thinking that the "Bible that Jesus read" would be the Septaguint, i.e. the Greek translation of the Jewish Scriptures?QUOTE]
.........................................................
No,David333,you would not be right.To start with,the LXX[72]never came out till 250AD pumped out by the heretic Origen.The LXX[72]is his 5th column.The LXX[72 was never ONLY aGreek translation of the Hebrew scriptures for it includes the New Testament.Plus it includes The Apocaphal books as PART of the connon of scriptures.But the King James had the apocrapha in between the scriptures,just like Scofield's notes.The LXX is the most corrupted work around this planet with whole sections of the Bible taken out including several Books of both the new and old testaments.Then they also add garbage In the New Testament like The shepherd of Hermes,and the Epistle of Barnabus.
They teach to give yourself over to the beast and to take the NAME of the Beast.Real trustworthy junk there.Nothing but a trashbin version.And this is what the modern versions claim to be the best?
HA!HA!HA! ho!hooooweee!WHAT A LOAD OF BUNK.KJV is the Standard.

dear david...hello there and blessing's be multiplied to you
well do you realize what you have just done david ???
well my friend ...the devil for one...is extremly mad at you....for exposing him !
and his doctrines of devils, that originated from the pits of hell !!
nice work david !!
actually all praise and glory to the king ( lord jesus ) for enlightening david and arming him with this knowledge, in the first place !! Therefore david, can be set for the defence of the gospel, and try to look out for the flock of god, and harbour them to safety....like a lighthouse that acts as a guide to ships in the midst of darkness, and in many cases, prevents complete shipwreck to those who are boarded. And ALSO as a compass that points people in the right direction !! lest they take the wrong path.....and end-up being lost !!

thank you lord for this post !!

beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men !!

intruding into those things which he has not seen, vainly puffed up by his fleshly mind

and this i say, lest any man should beguile you , with enticing words.

all bible quotes taken from colossians chapter two....from the old kjv !!

 

[PaladinValer]

King James must be rolling in his grave right now...

 

[Dmckay]

If you are interested in the true history of the Septuagint you can go to this link:http://www.studylight.org/enc/isb/view.cgi?number=T7825

The Septuagint's main value, prior to the discovery and translation of the Dead Sea Scrolls is that it was a direct translation of the Hebrew text from manuscripts that were written around 950 BC. Because of this they represented the oldest Hebrew manuscripts available until the Dead Sea Scrolls were discovered. Now, the accuracy of the Septuagint has been confirmed by comparison to the texts available from the Dead Sea caves.

Another equally important value of the Septuagint is that it was commissioned by the Library at Alexandria in Egypt to be as accurate grammatically as possible a Greek translation of the Hebrew Scriptures. It was a translation performed by 70 of the top Hebrew and Greek scholars that were available at the time.

Because of this we can see how many of the Hebrew terms which are difficult to translate related to their equivalent meaning in the Greek language which was much more expressive in understanding and explaining theological concepts.

Since the Septuagint was accomplished long before the life of Origen who lived from 185-254 AD he had nothing to do with it's development. the only thing that they had in common is that both had their roots in Alexandria. While it is true that Origen was influential in Alexandria, and had quite a few theological problems, since his problems were based in Gnosticism and an allegorical view of Scripture he didn't need to try and re-write Scripture to say what he wanted it to say. He just interpreted Scripture however he wanted no matter what it really said. Just like many of the false teachers today.

As to the original post. The language used in Israel at the time of Christ was Aramaic which was a derivation from Hebrew brought on by the extended exile in Babylon. Only the very educated in Israel were able to read Hebrew. Mainly, the Scribes, which was why they were the Copyists of the Hebrew manuscripts, as well as the interpreters of the Law. Koine Greek was the trade language of the Roman Empire and most Jews were able to communicate in Koine Greek, at least enough to get by. Similar to many people in other countries today being able to speak some English in order to accomodate un-educated American travelers abroad.

 

[herev]

Peter, there is NO evidence that the Septuagent (LXX) {LXX actully means 70, not 72--it's a Roman Numeral}, was intrdoced by Origen. It WAS absolutely the version of the OT Scriptures that would have been commonly in use during the first century AD Greek culture, which included Palestine. Paul and Jesus would have been quite familiar with it.

 

[amorosi]

If you are interested in the true history of the Septuagint you can go to this link:http://www.studylight.org/enc/isb/view.cgi?number=T7825

The Septuagint's main value, prior to the discovery and translation of the Dead Sea Scrolls is that it was a direct translation of the Hebrew text from manuscripts that were written around 950 BC. Because of this they represented the oldest Hebrew manuscripts available until the Dead Sea Scrolls were discovered. Now, the accuracy of the Septuagint has been confirmed by comparison to the texts available from the Dead Sea caves.

Another equally important value of the Septuagint is that it was commissioned by the Library at Alexandria in Egypt to be as accurate grammatically as possible a Greek translation of the Hebrew Scriptures. It was a translation performed by 70 of the top Hebrew and Greek scholars that were available at the time.

Because of this we can see how many of the Hebrew terms which are difficult to translate related to their equivalent meaning in the Greek language which was much more expressive in understanding and explaining theological concepts.

Since the Septuagint was accomplished long before the life of Origen who lived from 185-254 AD he had nothing to do with it's development. the only thing that they had in common is that both had their roots in Alexandria. While it is true that Origen was influential in Alexandria, and had quite a few theological problems, since his problems were based in Gnosticism and an allegorical view of Scripture he didn't need to try and re-write Scripture to say what he wanted it to say. He just interpreted Scripture however he wanted no matter what it really said. Just like many of the false teachers today.

As to the original post. The language used in Israel at the time of Christ was Aramaic which was a derivation from Hebrew brought on by the extended exile in Babylon. Only the very educated in Israel were able to read Hebrew. Mainly, the Scribes, which was why they were the Copyists of the Hebrew manuscripts, as well as the interpreters of the Law. Koine Greek was the trade language of the Roman Empire and most Jews were able to communicate in Koine Greek, at least enough to get by. Similar to many people in other countries today being able to speak some English in order to accomodate un-educated American travelers abroad.

according to jesus...in matthew chapter 23...what was the expected fete, of the scribe and the pharisee, of that era ??? and who were they- the descendant's of ?? according to jesus ??
those who killed all the true prophets before them !!! is the answer !!

pay no attention to fables, which only give rise to more and more questions
but stay rather with the simplicity that is in christ....as exhorted by apostle paul in 2nd corinthians.