In Defense of the Septuagint.

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
S

Scotth1960

Guest
#1
In Defense of the Septuagint. Fr. Ted's Blog August 13, 2009
http:// frted.wordpress.com/2009/08/13/in-defense-of-the-septuagint/

In Defense of the Septuagint. by Richard Anthony
http:// ecclesia.org/truth/defense.html

For further Study:

New English Translation of the Septuagint. NETS New York: Oxford University Press.

Orthodox Study Bible. Copyright 2008, Thomas Nelson Bibles, Nashville, TN. SAAS OT Copyright by St. Athanasius Academy of Orthodox Theology, Elk Grove, CA, Fr. Jack N. Sparks, Ph.D., Dean, editor.

 
R

RachelBibleStudent

Guest
#2
the septuagint is corrupt and full of errors...

for an example just add up all of the genealogical information before the flood in both the hebrew masoretic text and the greek septuagint...

you will find that in the hebrew masoretic text methuselah died in the same year that the flood happened...which is entirely possible and consistent with the rest of scripture...but in the septuagint methuselah dies seven years after the flood...which is impossible for obvious reasons
 
R

RachelBibleStudent

Guest
#3
oh and to follow up on what i just said...

the reason for the discrepancy is probably because the translators of the septuagint wanted to lengthen the genealogies to make them agree with -pagan- chronologies...especially manetho's history of ancient egypt

evidently it had not occurred to the septuagint translators to check to make sure that their modified genealogy still added up correctly
 
Aug 18, 2011
392
0
0
#4
oh and to follow up on what i just said...

the reason for the discrepancy is probably because the translators of the septuagint wanted to lengthen the genealogies to make them agree with -pagan- chronologies...especially manetho's history of ancient egypt

evidently it had not occurred to the septuagint translators to check to make sure that their modified genealogy still added up correctly
That is not even true. The Septuagint does NOT say that Mesuhalah died in the same year as the flood. Read this for proof:

Under the sub-heading: Discordant Ages Of The Patriarchs In The LXX:

"In Chapter one, Floyd does speak of the discrepancies between the Masoretic Hebrew text and the Septuagint text, as far the length of years that some Patriarchs lived. However, he has a pre-conceived idea that, since the Masoretic Hebrew text is more accurate, that the Septuagint must be wrong. He does not consider the possibility that the Septuagint could be correct, and the Masoretic Hebrew incorrect.

One of the reasons he gives for why the Septuagint is wrong is because of the age of Methuselah. The Septuagint records that he was 167 at the birth of Lamech (Genesis 5:25), while the Masoretic Hebrew reads 187. Here is his reasoning:


“The majority of LXX manuscripts give 167 as the age of Methuselah at the birth of his son, Lamech (the Masoretic Hebrew reads 187 - Gen. 5:25). However, if Methuselah were 167 at the birth of Lamech, Lamech 188 at the birth of Noah, and Noah 600 at the Flood (as recorded in the LXX), Methuselah would have been 955 at the date of the Flood. Since he lived to be 969 (the life span given in both), the LXX becomes entangled in the absurdity of making Methuselah survive the Flood by 14 years! Yet Genesis 7-10 and II Peter 3:20 are adamant in proclaiming that only Noah, his three sons and all four of their wives; that is, only 8 souls survived the Deluge.”


It "seems" like a good argument! The only thing wrong with it is that Floyd is lying as to what the Brenton's edition of the Septuagint states! Both the Septuagint and Masoretic texts state that Methuselah died at 969 years of age; the Septuagint does not say 955 years old. Both manuscripts are in harmony with each other on this point. Floyd says the Septuagint records Methuselah being 167 at the birth of Lamech, Lamech being 188 at the birth of Noah, and Noah 600 at the Flood, which totals 955! Thus, he claims the Septuagint says Methuselah was 955 years old when he died. This is a lie!

In the Brenton's edition of the Septuagint, even though it does record that Methuselah was 167 at the birth of Lamech (Genesis 5:25), it records Lamech being 802 years at the birth of Noah (Genesis 5:26), and not 188 as Floyd claims it says. Therefore, 167 + 802 = 969 years old! Exactly what it's supposed to be. As a matter of fact, the Septuagint specifically states that Methuselah lived to be 969 years old in Genesis 5:27!!!

Therefore, Floyd's claim that the Septuagint records Methuselah being 955 is a blatant lie! The Septuagint says no such thing. Dear reader, you must not believe everything you read from those who would attack the Word of God. Please test these people, and read the Septuagint for yourself to see if it really says what these people claim it says.

After Floyd's blatant falsehood, in the very next paragraph he speculates as to why Methuselah's age is different in the Septuagint (which it is not); What is his claim? Because it is “a philosophy which embraced the basic precepts of evolution. That is, they were primeval evolutionists.”
So, here is Floyd accusing the writers of the Septuagint of being evolutionists! He comes to this conclusion on nothing more than his claim that the Septuagint says Methuselah lived to be 955! Yet, as is easily verified, the Septuagint says no such thing! The Septuagint says Methuselah lived to be 969 years old, just like the Masoretic Hebrew text states.
Not only is Floyd debating opinions of others about who wrote the Septuagint, but now he is digressing into his own opinions (based on a lie to begin with) about those "mystery" writers being evolutionists! Dear reader, God does not respect opinions and lies, but Truth.


So, since Chapter One mostly deals with people's “opinions” about the Septuagint, and misrepresentations about the Septuagint, I shall move on to Chapter 2."
 
Oct 2, 2011
416
3
0
#5
oh and to follow up on what i just said...

the reason for the discrepancy is probably because the translators of the septuagint wanted to lengthen the genealogies to make them agree with -pagan- chronologies...especially manetho's history of ancient egypt

evidently it had not occurred to the septuagint translators to check to make sure that their modified genealogy still added up correctly
Didn't Jesus, Paul, and the rest of the N.T. writers quote from the Septuagint?
 
Aug 18, 2011
392
0
0
#6
Don't believe everything you read. Study it and verify it for yourself.

The Brenton LXX says,

27 And all the days of Mathusala which he lived, were nine hundred and sixty and nine years, and he died.


The ESV says,

27 Thus all the days of Methuselah were 969 years, and he died.


Don't listen to everything that you read on the internet, its full of wolves and false prophets.
 
R

RachelBibleStudent

Guest
#7
i have verified it for myself... the septuagint has methuselah dying -after- the flood...which is clearly false

i don't know what your source is...or who this 'floyd' is...but the statement being called a 'blatant lie' doesn't even appear in the the 'floyd' quotation... i don't see him anywhere in the quotation claiming that methuselah died at the age of 955... in that quotation he correctly says that the flood would have happened when methuselah was 955 according to the septuagint...and since methuselah lived to be 969 he would have survived the flood

so the author you are citing is refuting a claim that was never made and has no bearing on the argument...

i will post the actual genealogies from the masoretic text and septuagint later so that you can verify it for yourself too
 
R

RachelBibleStudent

Guest
#8
Didn't Jesus, Paul, and the rest of the N.T. writers quote from the Septuagint?
yes and thankfully the holy spirit inspired them not to quote from any of the parts that are false :)
 
Aug 18, 2011
392
0
0
#10
i have verified it for myself... the septuagint has methuselah dying -after- the flood...which is clearly false

i don't know what your source is...or who this 'floyd' is...but the statement being called a 'blatant lie' doesn't even appear in the the 'floyd' quotation... i don't see him anywhere in the quotation claiming that methuselah died at the age of 955... in that quotation he correctly says that the flood would have happened when methuselah was 955 according to the septuagint...and since methuselah lived to be 969 he would have survived the flood

so the author you are citing is refuting a claim that was never made and has no bearing on the argument...

i will post the actual genealogies from the masoretic text and septuagint later so that you can verify it for yourself too

Read this : In Defense of the Septuagint



LXX

25 And Mathusala lived 167 years, and begot Lamech.
26 And Mathusala lived after his begetting Lamech 802 years, and begot sons and daughters.
27 And all the days of Mathusala which he lived, were 969 years, and he died.

KJV
25 When Methuselah had lived 187 years, he fathered Lamech.
26 Methuselah lived after he fathered Lamech 782 years and had other sons and daughters.
27 Thus all the days of Methuselah were 969 years, and he died.



It still adds up to the same number, 969.
 
Last edited:
R

RachelBibleStudent

Guest
#11
No, he didn't prove anything. The Septuagint does not state that he was 955 at the time of the flood.

Read this : In Defense of the Septuagint



LXX

25 And Mathusala lived 167 years, and begot Lamech.
26 And Mathusala lived after his begetting Lamech 802 years, and begot sons and daughters.
27 And all the days of Mathusala which he lived, were 969 years, and he died.

KJV
25 When Methuselah had lived 187 years, he fathered Lamech.
26 Methuselah lived after he fathered Lamech 782 years and had other sons and daughters.
27 Thus all the days of Methuselah were 969 years, and he died.



It still adds up to the same number, 969.
the problem in the septuagint is not the total life span of methuselah...it is when methuselah died relative to the flood...

and your author is totally ignoring that fact and refuting an argument that was never made
 
Aug 18, 2011
392
0
0
#12
the problem in the septuagint is not the total life span of methuselah...it is when methuselah died relative to the flood...

and your author is totally ignoring that fact and refuting an argument that was never made
How does it say in the Septuagint that he lived during the flood if he lived 969 years, same as the Masoretic?
 
R

RachelBibleStudent

Guest
#13
How does it say in the Septuagint that he lived during the flood if he lived 969 years, same as the Masoretic?
i am making a thread about that topic right now... i will put a link here when it is done
 
S

Scotth1960

Guest
#15
the septuagint is corrupt and full of errors...

for an example just add up all of the genealogical information before the flood in both the hebrew masoretic text and the greek septuagint...

you will find that in the hebrew masoretic text methuselah died in the same year that the flood happened...which is entirely possible and consistent with the rest of scripture...but in the septuagint methuselah dies seven years after the flood...which is impossible for obvious reasons
The King James Version is corrupt and has some errors. See Isaiah 53:11 in the KJV. The NIV based on the Greek Septuagint and the Dead Sea Scrolls Bible in Isaiah 53:11 has the word light. The KJV lacks the word "light" in Isaiah 53:11; see Isaiah 8:16,20 KJV!
The Masoretic Hebrew text is not the original, inerrant, infallible Word of God!

 
7

777Yeshua777

Guest
#16
I see a number of new topic threads started by Scott1960. They are commonly similar to this one in that they are not real questions or discussions worth engaging. A link to an article. That's it.

Sadly, like this one, they are almost always ridiculous. Why defend the LXX? Why filter through yet another translation when the original Hebrew text is readily available. The commentary and other works expounding on it are voluminous.

I know it is all an effort to justify Eastern Orthodoxy. OK, fine. If that's the church you belong to, be happy. But, stop trying to sell everyone on the idea that it is "more right" than any other denomination. It really is a waste of time.
 

dscherck

Banned [Reason: persistent, ongoing Catholic heres
Aug 3, 2009
1,272
3
0
#17
I see a number of new topic threads started by Scott1960. They are commonly similar to this one in that they are not real questions or discussions worth engaging. A link to an article. That's it.

Sadly, like this one, they are almost always ridiculous. Why defend the LXX? Why filter through yet another translation when the original Hebrew text is readily available. The commentary and other works expounding on it are voluminous.

I know it is all an effort to justify Eastern Orthodoxy. OK, fine. If that's the church you belong to, be happy. But, stop trying to sell everyone on the idea that it is "more right" than any other denomination. It really is a waste of time.
But what if it is more right?
 
Aug 18, 2011
392
0
0
#18
I see a number of new topic threads started by Scott1960. They are commonly similar to this one in that they are not real questions or discussions worth engaging. A link to an article. That's it.

Sadly, like this one, they are almost always ridiculous. Why defend the LXX? Why filter through yet another translation when the original Hebrew text is readily available. The commentary and other works expounding on it are voluminous.

I know it is all an effort to justify Eastern Orthodoxy. OK, fine. If that's the church you belong to, be happy. But, stop trying to sell everyone on the idea that it is "more right" than any other denomination. It really is a waste of time.
The bible's that we have in America today are not the original Hebrew text, the Hebrew texts that we have only come from the 11th to 16th centuries AD. We lost any complete ancient texts of the Hebrew Old Testament.
That is why the Codex Leningrad, the oldest complete Hebrew Old Testament Scriptures, originates from the 11th century AD. On the contrary, the oldest extant Greek Septuagint Old Testament Scriptures originates from the 4th century AD, its name is the Codex Sinaiticus.

Go to its offical website for more information, this is the oldest Old Testament bible in the world and it is a Septuagint translation: Codex Sinaiticus - Home
 
S

Scotth1960

Guest
#19
That is not even true. The Septuagint does NOT say that Mesuhalah died in the same year as the flood. Read this for proof:

Under the sub-heading: Discordant Ages Of The Patriarchs In The LXX:

"In Chapter one, Floyd does speak of the discrepancies between the Masoretic Hebrew text and the Septuagint text, as far the length of years that some Patriarchs lived. However, he has a pre-conceived idea that, since the Masoretic Hebrew text is more accurate, that the Septuagint must be wrong. He does not consider the possibility that the Septuagint could be correct, and the Masoretic Hebrew incorrect.

One of the reasons he gives for why the Septuagint is wrong is because of the age of Methuselah. The Septuagint records that he was 167 at the birth of Lamech (Genesis 5:25), while the Masoretic Hebrew reads 187. Here is his reasoning:


“The majority of LXX manuscripts give 167 as the age of Methuselah at the birth of his son, Lamech (the Masoretic Hebrew reads 187 - Gen. 5:25). However, if Methuselah were 167 at the birth of Lamech, Lamech 188 at the birth of Noah, and Noah 600 at the Flood (as recorded in the LXX), Methuselah would have been 955 at the date of the Flood. Since he lived to be 969 (the life span given in both), the LXX becomes entangled in the absurdity of making Methuselah survive the Flood by 14 years! Yet Genesis 7-10 and II Peter 3:20 are adamant in proclaiming that only Noah, his three sons and all four of their wives; that is, only 8 souls survived the Deluge.”


It "seems" like a good argument! The only thing wrong with it is that Floyd is lying as to what the Brenton's edition of the Septuagint states! Both the Septuagint and Masoretic texts state that Methuselah died at 969 years of age; the Septuagint does not say 955 years old. Both manuscripts are in harmony with each other on this point. Floyd says the Septuagint records Methuselah being 167 at the birth of Lamech, Lamech being 188 at the birth of Noah, and Noah 600 at the Flood, which totals 955! Thus, he claims the Septuagint says Methuselah was 955 years old when he died. This is a lie!

In the Brenton's edition of the Septuagint, even though it does record that Methuselah was 167 at the birth of Lamech (Genesis 5:25), it records Lamech being 802 years at the birth of Noah (Genesis 5:26), and not 188 as Floyd claims it says. Therefore, 167 + 802 = 969 years old! Exactly what it's supposed to be. As a matter of fact, the Septuagint specifically states that Methuselah lived to be 969 years old in Genesis 5:27!!!

Therefore, Floyd's claim that the Septuagint records Methuselah being 955 is a blatant lie! The Septuagint says no such thing. Dear reader, you must not believe everything you read from those who would attack the Word of God. Please test these people, and read the Septuagint for yourself to see if it really says what these people claim it says.

After Floyd's blatant falsehood, in the very next paragraph he speculates as to why Methuselah's age is different in the Septuagint (which it is not); What is his claim? Because it is “a philosophy which embraced the basic precepts of evolution. That is, they were primeval evolutionists.”
So, here is Floyd accusing the writers of the Septuagint of being evolutionists! He comes to this conclusion on nothing more than his claim that the Septuagint says Methuselah lived to be 955! Yet, as is easily verified, the Septuagint says no such thing! The Septuagint says Methuselah lived to be 969 years old, just like the Masoretic Hebrew text states.
Not only is Floyd debating opinions of others about who wrote the Septuagint, but now he is digressing into his own opinions (based on a lie to begin with) about those "mystery" writers being evolutionists! Dear reader, God does not respect opinions and lies, but Truth.


So, since Chapter One mostly deals with people's “opinions” about the Septuagint, and misrepresentations about the Septuagint, I shall move on to Chapter 2."
Dear NiceneChristian: Part of the reason I post so many links and sources of titles of books and titles of online Google websites is I want people to study the sources I agree with themselves, and see whether these things be so. If they start with the presupposition that Evangelical Protestantism is the truth, the KJV is the inspired word of God, the Apocrypha of the KJV and other Bibles should be rejected without study, and that the 5 solas of the Protestant Reformation are the heart and essence of the true Biblical Gospel, that the Hebrew Masoretic text attested to by unbelieving Anti-Christian Jewish Rabbis, from a later date AD, is the true OT word of God, then, of course, then, of course, they are going to hate the Septuagint and hate the Eastern Orthodox Church because it disagrees with their individualistic, subjectivist theology. And of course most of them are going to buy into the false humanistic pagan Filioquist Augustinian theology of double predestination, and deny human free will and human responsibility for sin. They will blame all evil on God's predestination, in the name of God's Absolute Sovereignty. They will also take John Calvin and Martin Luther as their two infallible Protestant popes.
Well, here is a source (book) I think is helpful for people who want to study the new ESV Bible of 2001 AD.
See: Mounce, William D., compiler. (2002). The Crossway Comprehensive Concordance of the Holy Bible, English Standard Version. Wheaton, IL: Crossway Books.
God save us all from every sin and every error. God have mercy on us. Amen. In Erie PA October 1/14, 2011 AD Scott R. Harrington, B.A. (psychology, Gannon University, Erie, PA, May, 1990 AD).
Take care!
God grant all of you many years. All of you, Christ remember in His Kingdom. Blessed is the Kingdom of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, now and ever and unto the ages of ages; Amen.

 
Nov 23, 2011
772
0
0
#20
[SIZE=3 said:
RachelBibleStudent;570111]the septuagint is corrupt and full of

errors...

for an example just add up all of the genealogical information before

the flood in both the hebrew masoretic text and the greek septuagint...[/SIZE]

you will find that in the hebrew masoretic text methuselah died in the

same year that the flood happened...which is entirely possible and

consistent with the rest of scripture...but in the septuagint methuselah

dies seven years after the flood...which is impossible for obvious

reasons




Dear RachelBibleStudent: Please now go and find 10 errors in the

Septuagint that are real errors, and not just depending upon your

private interpretation and eisogesis of the text. Next, find 10 serious

errors that contradict the doctrine of salvation by grace and/or the

doctrine of God as Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Then, maybe, you will

have a case against trusting and relying on the Septuagint. God bless

you. In Erie PA Scott R. Harrington PS Please give the exact reference

from the Septuagint regarding Methuselah and the year of Noah's flood,

and please make sure what you mean by Septuagint. There is more

than one edition of the Septuagint, so which one is the authentic one?