Septuagint

[tttallison]

The Significance of the Septuagint

The significance of the Septuagint translation can hardly be overestimated. Following the conquests of Alexander the Great (336-323 BC), Greek became the official language of Egypt, Syria and the eastern end of the Mediterranean Sea. The Septuagint translation made the Hebrew scriptures available both to the Jews who no longer spoke their ancestral language and to the entire Greek-speaking world. The Septuagint was later to become the Bible of the Greek-speaking early Church, and is frequently quoted in the New Testament.
(biblearchaeology.org)

It was the adoption of the Septuagint by the early Church that was the biggest factor in its eventual abandonment by the Jews. The Septuagint's use of parthenos, meaning 'virgin' in Isaiah 7:14 to describe the mother of the promised son Immanuel, was used by Matthew 1:23 as evidence for Yeshua's virgin birth.
(biblearchaeology.org)

The text used to translate the Septuagint was the Hebrew Pentateuch.

Where do you find this Septuagint today, or did it only exist from approximately 300 BC to 100 AD? Do you have a copy of the Septuagint today?

 

[tttallison]

Jesus quoted from the LXX and read from it when he went into the Synagague in Nazareth. When Jesus quoted from the LXX which is known to be what was read in the 1st century Synagagues and called it "The Word of God" that tells us that a translation can be the Word of God.

If you insist on reading the scriptures from the ancient Hebrew then you are going to have to rely on the Masoretic text that was a translation of the LXX back into ancient Hebrew using their best attempt to restore the ancient Hebrew around 800 AD or between the 6th and 10th century (middle ages). They used the Samaritan Pentateuch to help them determine if they were recovering the ancient Hebrew since it was one of the best examples of ancient Hebrew but it is only 5 books of the bible. Supposedly the Masoretic text is a good attempt at recovering the language but you don't have good authority to insist that it trumps the LXX just because it is Hebrew. The challenge of translating from Koine Greek of the LXX to the ancient Hebrew and 1) Know that you are getting it right, and 2) restoring ryming words, play on words, idioms of ancient Hebrew is at best a noble attempt by the translators but should not be turned into an argument as being more DIVINE or inspired than the LXX since it is 800 years later. It is not the original manuscripts or even copies of the original Hebrew before the LXX which has been lost. The best we can do is to use the LXX to translate to Hebrew. You have no text older than the LXX to claim as your source. Your only argument for superiority of the Hebrew over the LXX is to try and persuade people that the translators in the 10 century were divinly inspired and the translators of the LXX were not. And I don't think you are going to persuade any thinking person of that.

Do you have a copy of this Septuagint today?

 

[Scribe]

Do you have a copy of this Septuagint today?

Google that question. Apparantely there arevquite a lot of copies and manuscripts from the LXX.

As to Matthew being originally written in Hebrew. Papias (125-150AD) mentioned it. However when he said it, the greek version was what was known and read by the church and no one but him ever knew about the Hebrew version so it doesn't really matter does it. Why speculate that the Greek Version that was the only one ever known by the church from the beginning and even when Papias mentioned an original Hebrew version is in some way lacking, or corrupt or not as good as a Hebrew version that no one has ever seen.

Any attempts in the past to create a Hebrew version of Matthew would be less authoritative than the Greek version that was already known and accepted by the church at the time of Papias.

And there would be no way to prove that the Hebrew version was correct since it is simply translating from Greek to Hebrew, which is what the MT did with the LXX. Making the MT a middle ages translation from Greek back into Hebrew and using the few ancient Hebrews text before the Exile as a guide to help in making translation decisions about restoring ancient Hebrew.

I am not a textual expert so I will stay in my lane but I do get suspicious of claims of MT being superiour over LXX as that does not make logical sense.

 

[awelight]

awelight greetings,

sorry I never replied to your post.

The Septuagint, as originally written, does not exist today. The Greek Orthodox Church never had its own bible. They used only their liturgy as the source of the Word of God. They claim their liturgy is based on the Septuagint, but that Septuagint is not the modern Septuagint. They claim that the English speaking Greek Orthodox church used the King James Bible because it aligned with their liturgy.

https://churchmotherofgod.org/artic...entic Greek Text of the Bible is Preserved by

The Oxford University Press attests to the fact that today's Septuagint is not the original Septuagint. You will find this information in the forward to the NETS (New English Translation of the Septuagint.)

NETS: New English Translation of the Septuagint

https://ccat.sas.upenn.edu/nets/edition/00-front-nets.pdf (To the Reader of Nets) Page xiii

Yes.. and this is why I stated in my original post, that one should not limit themselves to anyone source of information. Personally, I prefer to parse the Greek Text myself and take the time to translate it into English. If one has access to the variant readings of the manuscript copies, then you can get a good fill for which words maybe controversial and which are rock solid.

Thanks for your reply.

 

[Inquisitor]

Where do you find this Septuagint today, or did it only exist from approximately 300 BC to 100 AD? Do you have a copy of the Septuagint today?

Here are some verses taken from the Septuagint the Hebrew Version follows.

Matthew 3:3; Mark 1:3; John 1:23 / Isaiah 40:3 — make “His paths straight.” Hebrew — make “level in the desert a highway.”

Matthew 9:13; 12:7 / Hosea 6:6 — I desire “mercy” and not sacrifice. Hebrew — I desire “goodness” and not sacrifice.

Matthew 12:21 / Isaiah 42:4 — in His name will the Gentiles hope (or trust). Hebrew — the isles shall wait for his law.

Matthew 13:15 / Isaiah 6:10 — heart grown dull; eyes have closed; to heal. Hebrew — heart is fat; ears are heavy; eyes are shut; be healed.

Matthew 15:9; Mark 7:7 / Isaiah 29:13 — teaching as doctrines the precepts of men. Hebrew — a commandment of men (not doctrines).

Matthew 21:16 / Psalm 8:2 — out of the mouth of babes and sucklings thou has “perfect praise.” Hebrew — thou has “established strength.”

Mark 7:6–8 — Jesus quotes Isaiah 29:13 from the Septuagint — “This people honors me with their lips, but their heart is far from me; in vain do they worship me, teaching as doctrines the precepts of men.”

Luke 3:5–6 / Isaiah 40:4–5 — crooked be made straight, rough ways smooth, shall see salvation. Hebrew — omits these phrases.

Luke 4:18 / Isaiah 61:1 — and recovering of sight to the blind. Hebrew — the opening of prison to them that are bound.

Luke 4:18 / Isaiah 58:6 — to set at liberty those that are oppressed (or bruised). Hebrew — to let the oppressed go free.

John 6:31 / Psalm 78:24 — He gave them “bread” out of heaven to eat. Hebrew — gave them “food” or “grain” from heaven.

John 12:38 / Isaiah 53:1 — who has believed our “report?” Hebrew — who has believed our “message?”

John 12:40 / Isaiah 6:10 — lest they should see with eyes…turn for me to heal them. Hebrew — shut their eyes…and be healed.

Acts 2:19 / Joel 2:30 — blood and fire and “vapor” of smoke. Hebrew — blood and fire and “pillars” or “columns” of smoke.

Acts 2:25–26 / Psalm 16:8 — I saw…tongue rejoiced…dwell in hope.. Hebrew — I have set…glory rejoiced…dwell in safety.

Acts 4:26 / Psalm 2:1 — the rulers “were gathered together.” Hebrew — rulers “take counsel together.”

Acts 7:14 / Gen. 46:27; Deuteronomy 10:22 — Stephen says “seventy-five” souls went down to Egypt. Hebrew — “seventy” people went.

Acts 7:27–28 / Exodus 2:14 — uses “ruler” and judge; killed the Egyptian “yesterday.” Hebrew — uses “prince” and there is no reference to “yesterday.”

Acts 7:43 / Amos 5:26–27 — the tent of “Moloch” and star of god of Rephan. Hebrew — “your king,” shrine, and star of your god.

Acts 8:33 / Isaiah 53:7–8 — in his humiliation justice was denied him. Hebrew — by oppression…he was taken away.

Acts 13:41 / Habakkuk 1:5 — you “scoffers” and wonder and “perish.” Hebrew — you “among the nations,” and “be astounded.”

Acts 15:17 / Amos 9:12 — the rest (or remnant) of “men.” Hebrew — the remnant of “Edom.”

Romans 2:24 / Isaiah 52:5 — the name of God is blasphemed among the Gentiles. Hebrew — blasphemed (there is no mention of the Gentiles).

Romans 3:4 / Psalm 51:4 — thou mayest “prevail” (or overcome) when thou art judged. Hebrew — thou might “be clear” when thou judges.

Romans 3:12 / Psalm 14:1,3 — they “have gone wrong.” Hebrew — they are “corrupt” or “filthy.”

Romans 3:13 / Psalm 5:9 — they use their tongues to deceive. Hebrew — they flatter with their tongues. There is no “deceit” language.

Romans 3:13 / Psalm 140:3 — the venom of “asps” is under their lips. Hebrew — “Adder’s” poison is under their lips.

Romans 3:14 / Psalm 10:7 — whose mouth is full of curses and “bitterness.” Hebrew — cursing and “deceit and oppression.”

Romans 9:17 / Exodus 9:16 — my power “in you”; my name may be “proclaimed.” Hebrew — show “thee”; may name might be “declared.”
Romans 9:25 / Hosea 2:23 — I will call my people; I will call my beloved. Hebrew — I will have mercy (love versus mercy).

Romans 9:27 / Isaiah 10:22 — only a remnant of them “will be saved.” Hebrew — only a remnant of them “will return.”

Romans 9:29 / Isaiah 1:9 — had not left us “children.” Hebrew — Jehovah had left us a “very small remnant.”

Romans 9:33; 10:11; 1 Peter 2:6 / Isaiah 28:16 — he who believes will not be “put to shame.” Hebrew — shall not be “in haste.”

Romans 10:18 / Psalm 19:4 — their “voice” has gone out. Hebrew — their “line” is gone out.

Romans 10:20 / Isaiah 65:1 — I have “shown myself” to those who did not ask for me. Hebrew — I am “inquired of” by them.

Romans 10:21 / Isaiah 65:2 — a “disobedient and contrary” people. Hebrew — a “rebellious” people.

Romans 11:9–10 / Psalm 69:22–23 — “pitfall” and “retribution” and “bend their backs.” Hebrew — “trap” and “make their loins shake.”

Romans 11:26 / Isaiah 59:20 — will banish “ungodliness.” Hebrew — turn from “transgression.”

Romans 11:27 / Isaiah 27:9 — when I take away their sins. Hebrew — this is all the fruit of taking away his sin.

Romans 11:34; 1 Corinthians 2:16 / Isaiah 40:13 -the “mind” of the Lord; His “counselor.” Hebrew — “spirit” of the Lord; “taught” Him.

Romans 12:20 / Prov. 25:21 — feed him and give him to drink. Hebrew — give him “bread” to eat and “water” to drink.

Romans 15:12 / Isaiah 11:10 — the root of Jesse…“to rule the Gentiles.” Hebrew — stands for an ensign. There is nothing about the Gentiles.

Romans 15:21 / Isaiah 52:15 — been told “of him”; heard “of him.” Hebrew — does not mention “him” (the object of the prophecy).

1 Corinthians 1:19 / Isaiah 29:14 — “I will destroy” the wisdom of the wise. Hebrew — wisdom of their wise men “shall perish.”

1 Corinthians 5:13 / Deuteronomy 17:7 — remove the “wicked person.” Hebrew — purge the “evil.” This is more generic evil in the MT.

1 Corinthians 15:55 / Hosea 13:14 — O death, where is thy “sting?” Hebrew — O death, where are your “plagues?”

2 Corinthians 4:13 / Psalm 116:10 — I believed and so I spoke (past tense). Hebrew — I believe, for I will speak (future tense).

2 Corinthians 6:2 / Isaiah 49:8 — I have “listened” to you. Hebrew — I have “answered” you.

Galatians 3:10 / Deuteronomy 27:26 — cursed be every one who does not “abide” by all things. Hebrew — does not “confirm” the words.
Galatians 3:13 / Deuteronomy 21:23 — cursed is everyone who hangs on a “tree.” Hebrew — a hanged man is accursed. The word “tree” does not follow.

Galatians 4:27 / Isaiah 54:1 — “rejoice” and “break forth and shout.” Hebrew — “sing” and “break forth into singing.”

2 Timothy 2:19 / Numbers 16:5 — The Lord “knows” those who are His. Hebrew — God will “show” who are His.

Hebrews 1:6 / Deuteronomy 32:43 — let all the angels of God worship Him. Hebrew — the Masoretic text omits this phrase from Deuteronomy 32:43.

Hebrews 1:12 / Psalm 102:25 — like a “mantle” … “roll them”… “will be changed.” Hebrew — “raiment”… “change”…“pass away.”

Hebrews 2:7 / Psalm 8:5 — thou has made Him a little “lower than angels.” Hebrew — made Him but a little “lower than God.”

Hebrews 2:12 / Psalm 22:22 — I will “ sing” thy praise. Hebrew — I will praise thee. The LXX and most NTs (but not the RSV) have “sing.”

Hebrews 2:13 / Isaiah 8:17 — I will “put my trust in Him.” Hebrew — I will “look for Him.”

Hebrews 3:15 / Psalm 95:8 — do not harden your hearts as “in the rebellion.” Hebrew — harden not your hearts “as at Meribah.”

Hebrews 3:15; 4:7 / Psalm 95:7 — when you hear His voice do not harden not your hearts. Hebrew — oh that you would hear His voice!

Hebrews 8:9–10 / Jeremiah 31:32–33 — (nothing about husband); laws into their mind. Hebrew — I was a husband; law in their inward parts.

Hebrews 9:28 / Isaiah 10:22 — “to save those” who are eagerly awaiting for Him. Hebrew — a remnant of them “shall return.”

Hebrews 10:5 / Psalm 40:6 — “but a body hast thou prepared for me.” Hebrew — “mine ears hast thou opened.”

Hebrews 10:38 / Habakkuk 2:3–4 — if he shrinks (or draws) back, my soul shall have no pleasure. Hebrew — his soul is puffed up, not upright.

Hebrews 11:5 / Genesis. 5:24 — Enoch was not “found.” Hebrew — Enoch was “not.”

Hebrews 11:21 / Genesis. 47:31 — Israel, bowing “over the head of his staff.” Hebrew — there is nothing about bowing over the head of his staff.

Hebrews 12:6 / Proverbs 3:12 — He chastises every son whom He receives. Hebrew — even as a father the son in whom he delights.

Hebrews 13:6 / Psalm 118:6 — the Lord “is my helper.” Hebrew — Jehova “is on my side.” The LXX and the NT are identical.

James 4:6 / Proverbs 3:34 — God opposes the proud but gives grace to the humble. Hebrew — He scoffs at scoffers and gives grace to the lowly.

1 Peter 1:24 / Isaiah 40:6 — all its “glory” like the flower. Hebrew — all the “goodliness” as the flower.

1 Peter 2:9 / Exodus 19:6 — you are a “royal priesthood.” Hebrew — you shall be to me a “kingdom of priests.”

1 Peter 2:9 / Isaiah 43:21 — God’s own people…who called you out of darkness. Hebrew — which I formed myself. These are different actions.

1 Peter 2:22 / Isaiah 53:9 — he “committed no sin.” Hebrew — he “had done no violence.”

1 Peter 4:18 / Proverbs 11:31 — if a righteous man “is scarcely saved.” Hebrew — if the righteous “is recompensed.”

1 Peter 5:5 / Proverbs 3:34 — God opposes the proud but gives grace to the humble. Hebrew — He scoffs at scoffers and gives grace to lowly.

Isaiah 11:2 — this verse describes the Seven Gifts of the Holy Spirit, but the seventh gift, “piety,” is only found in the Septuagint.

 

[Inquisitor]

Where do you find this Septuagint today, or did it only exist from approximately 300 BC to 100 AD? Do you have a copy of the Septuagint today?

If you read the New Testament then when you read an apostles quotation from
the Old Testament. Your more than likely reading the Septuagint.

You have been reading the same Septuagint as the Gospel authors.

I doubt whether any of the apostles could read Hebrew except for Paul.

 

[tttallison]

Yes.. and this is why I stated in my original post, that one should not limit themselves to anyone source of information. Personally, I prefer to parse the Greek Text myself and take the time to translate it into English. If one has access to the variant readings of the manuscript copies, then you can get a good fill for which words maybe controversial and which are rock solid.

Thanks for your reply.

I would ask, when, and where your Septuagint has originated from. Does it have a chain of evidence? If it is a conglomerate, what are those manuscripts?

 

[tttallison]

If you read the New Testament then when you read an apostles quotation from
the Old Testament. Your more than likely reading the Septuagint.

You have been reading the same Septuagint as the Gospel authors.

I doubt whether any of the apostles could read Hebrew except for Paul.

Can you tell me which manuscript this Septuagint comes from?

 

[tttallison]

Google that question. Apparantely there arevquite a lot of copies and manuscripts from the LXX.

As to Matthew being originally written in Hebrew. Papias (125-150AD) mentioned it. However when he said it, the greek version was what was known and read by the church and no one but him ever knew about the Hebrew version so it doesn't really matter does it. Why speculate that the Greek Version that was the only one ever known by the church from the beginning and even when Papias mentioned an original Hebrew version is in some way lacking, or corrupt or not as good as a Hebrew version that no one has ever seen.

Any attempts in the past to create a Hebrew version of Matthew would be less authoritative than the Greek version that was already known and accepted by the church at the time of Papias.

And there would be no way to prove that the Hebrew version was correct since it is simply translating from Greek to Hebrew, which is what the MT did with the LXX. Making the MT a middle ages translation from Greek back into Hebrew and using the few ancient Hebrews text before the Exile as a guide to help in making translation decisions about restoring ancient Hebrew.

I am not a textual expert so I will stay in my lane but I do get suspicious of claims of MT being superiour over LXX as that does not make logical sense.

Can you tell me which, or what manuscript of the LXX your statements are derived from?

 

[JohnDB]

Okay....
Here's some tidbits that most do not really understand.

Jerome (early church father) translated the Old Testament into early Latin/Greek as well as the Gospel letters and Paul's writings to form what eventually became the Latin Vulgate.

He had to use the Masoretic texts himself as the original LXX had been corrupted into four different works at this point. The Gospel letters and Paul's letters also had consistency errors between the various copies.

Jesus did NOT use a Greek translation....that was Verboten. Would not have been in any synagogue in Israel. He would have used an Aramaic translation called Targums which also had little explanations like your study Bible has today. About a third wasn't ever commented on. Like Psalms and Daniel...never got the footnotes like the Torah, wisdom, history sections or some of the prophetic books did.

So once Jerome retransmitted the Old Testament again he labeled it the Septuagint again (not really deserving the title but whatever) and made it available for hand copying again.

Problems abound with the Latin Vulgate....nobody took their hand transcription seriously enough to be exacting every time. (Unlike the masoretes) Paraphrasing endings and margin sermon note inclusions were common and carried forward.

Look at "Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy " for a complete thesis on this subject. It covers most of this.

Greek translation of the scriptures in Israel was considered to be supporting the Roman Empire and therefore treasonous. Especially since they had schools aplenty for teaching reading and writing in Hebrew all over Israel. School was made legally compulsory in 60 AD for all Jewish children. But it wasn't like they had not been going up to this point.

 

[JohnDB]

Also....
Realized I hadn't put any dates...
Jerome 347AD-420AD.

 

[tttallison]

Okay....
Here's some tidbits that most do not really understand.

Jerome (early church father) translated the Old Testament into early Latin/Greek as well as the Gospel letters and Paul's writings to form what eventually became the Latin Vulgate.

He had to use the Masoretic texts himself as the original LXX had been corrupted into four different works at this point. The Gospel letters and Paul's letters also had consistency errors between the various copies.

Jesus did NOT use a Greek translation....that was Verboten. Would not have been in any synagogue in Israel. He would have used an Aramaic translation called Targums which also had little explanations like your study Bible has today. About a third wasn't ever commented on. Like Psalms and Daniel...never got the footnotes like the Torah, wisdom, history sections or some of the prophetic books did.

So once Jerome retransmitted the Old Testament again he labeled it the Septuagint again (not really deserving the title but whatever) and made it available for hand copying again.

Problems abound with the Latin Vulgate....nobody took their hand transcription seriously enough to be exacting every time. (Unlike the masoretes) Paraphrasing endings and margin sermon note inclusions were common and carried forward.

Look at "Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy " for a complete thesis on this subject. It covers most of this.

Greek translation of the scriptures in Israel was considered to be supporting the Roman Empire and therefore treasonous. Especially since they had schools aplenty for teaching reading and writing in Hebrew all over Israel. School was made legally compulsory in 60 AD for all Jewish children. But it wasn't like they had not been going up to this point.

John Greetings

Can you tell everyone where they can get a copy of the Septuagint today?

 

[Inquisitor]

Can you tell me which manuscript this Septuagint comes from?

A very simple test for the validity of the Greek translation would be to test
the Septuagint against the Dead Sea scrolls. The Dead Sea scrolls were written
in Hebrew and would be the Hebrew text at the time.

They were written within a century or two apart from each other.

Do you have another simple question?

 

[Inquisitor]

Okay....
Here's some tidbits that most do not really understand.

Jerome (early church father) translated the Old Testament into early Latin/Greek as well as the Gospel letters and Paul's writings to form what eventually became the Latin Vulgate.

He had to use the Masoretic texts himself as the original LXX had been corrupted into four different works at this point. The Gospel letters and Paul's letters also had consistency errors between the various copies.

Jesus did NOT use a Greek translation....that was Verboten. Would not have been in any synagogue in Israel. He would have used an Aramaic translation called Targums which also had little explanations like your study Bible has today. About a third wasn't ever commented on. Like Psalms and Daniel...never got the footnotes like the Torah, wisdom, history sections or some of the prophetic books did.

So once Jerome retransmitted the Old Testament again he labeled it the Septuagint again (not really deserving the title but whatever) and made it available for hand copying again.

Problems abound with the Latin Vulgate....nobody took their hand transcription seriously enough to be exacting every time. (Unlike the masoretes) Paraphrasing endings and margin sermon note inclusions were common and carried forward.

Look at "Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy " for a complete thesis on this subject. It covers most of this.

Greek translation of the scriptures in Israel was considered to be supporting the Roman Empire and therefore treasonous. Especially since they had schools aplenty for teaching reading and writing in Hebrew all over Israel. School was made legally compulsory in 60 AD for all Jewish children. But it wasn't like they had not been going up to this point.

The evidence is what matters.

The location that Jesus and the apostles lived would determine the language they spoke.

Galilee was a Gentile province and the apostles would have spoken Greek and Aramaic.

Jesus and the apostles were uneducated people.

Use of Hebrew
It seems the strong weight of evidence, and the prevailing opinion among both biblical and "secular" scholars seems to be that Hebrew had fallen out of general use much earlier, as a language of common, general use.

Jerusalem
It is likely some or all of the priestly class (Sadducees, perhaps some others, and their scribes) still spoke Hebrew in their own circles. Perhaps some of the Pharisees in Jerusalem also spoke Hebrew, and the scribes of the Pharisees could read it.

Galilee
It would have been even less likely in Galilee, primarily a Gentile area, and "Jews" of mixed race from the Hasmonean (Maccabees) period. Greek may have even been the mother tongue of some of the Jews in this region.

(orvillejenkins.com/languages/Hebrew first century)

 

[tttallison]

A very simple test for the validity of the Greek translation would be to test
the Septuagint against the Dead Sea scrolls. The Dead Sea scrolls were written
in Hebrew and would be the Hebrew text at the time.

They were written within a century or two apart from each other.

Do you have another simple question?

I understand how the Septuagint compares with the DSS.

There has been two men who have translated a singular Greek manuscript into English. This seems to be the source of the Septuagint for the last two hundred years. One of the men was Charles Thompson, the first Secretary of the Continental Congress, and the man who helped develop our national seal. The other man was Charles Brenton.

The manuscript they used was the Codex Vaticanus 1209. The Codex had been so denigrated that it was not considered worthy of collation. Most people do not understand that the real Septuagint has not existed for many centuries.

 

[Inquisitor]

I understand how the Septuagint compares with the DSS.

There has been two men who have translated a singular Greek manuscript into English. This seems to be the source of the Septuagint for the last two hundred years. One of the men was Charles Thompson, the first Secretary of the Continental Congress, and the man who helped develop our national seal. The other man was Charles Brenton.

The manuscript they used was the Codex Vaticanus 1209. The Codex had been so denigrated that it was not considered worthy of collation. Most people do not understand that the real Septuagint has not existed for many centuries.

The most important translation of them all was the Septuagint.

The Septuagint alone enabled first century Gentile Christians to read the Old Testament.

These early first century Gentiles did not have a New Testament to read.

“Gentlemen, have you a Septuagint? If not, sell all you have, and buy a Septuagint.”
(Ferdinand Hitzig, 19th-century German theologian)

 

[tttallison]

The most important translation of them all was the Septuagint.

The Septuagint alone enabled first century Gentile Christians to read the Old Testament.

These early first century Gentiles did not have a New Testament to read.

“Gentlemen, have you a Septuagint? If not, sell all you have, and buy a Septuagint.”
(Ferdinand Hitzig, 19th-century German theologian)

Inquisitor not sure I understand.

Are you saying there has been a Septuagint existing in the last two centuries? And if so, can you show us the text?

 

[JohnDB]

John Greetings

Can you tell everyone where they can get a copy of the Septuagint today?

There are many out there for download.

Which one do you wish for? Pre Jerome or post Jerome?

 

[JohnDB]

The evidence is what matters.

The location that Jesus and the apostles lived would determine the language they spoke.

Galilee was a Gentile province and the apostles would have spoken Greek and Aramaic.

Jesus and the apostles were uneducated people.

Use of Hebrew
It seems the strong weight of evidence, and the prevailing opinion among both biblical and "secular" scholars seems to be that Hebrew had fallen out of general use much earlier, as a language of common, general use.

Jerusalem
It is likely some or all of the priestly class (Sadducees, perhaps some others, and their scribes) still spoke Hebrew in their own circles. Perhaps some of the Pharisees in Jerusalem also spoke Hebrew, and the scribes of the Pharisees could read it.

Galilee
It would have been even less likely in Galilee, primarily a Gentile area, and "Jews" of mixed race from the Hasmonean (Maccabees) period. Greek may have even been the mother tongue of some of the Jews in this region.

(orvillejenkins.com/languages/Hebrew first century)

When the Hellenistic but devout Jews were expelled from Italy sure they appeared in Jerusalem and surrounding areas....but the Aramaic Tenakh was primarily used and the Greek was considered to be Goyim and impure.
The Aramaic also had Targums. The Septuagint did not.

Also Bethgashepher (elementary grade school) was extremely common long before Jesus was on the scene. Ancient Aramaic is not that much different from Hebrew. Kinda like Ancient Olde English vx modern English.
So where the Hellenistic Jews would have an issue with Aramaic the resident Jews would not.

 

[tttallison]

There are many out there for download.

Which one do you wish for? Pre Jerome or post Jerome?

The one that was in existence in 1870.