The Septuagint was corrupted: proof from Genesis 5

[Nehemiah6]

PART I
The Septuagint (LXX) is the corrupted Greek translation of the Hebrew Tanakh (from about 200 BC), which also includes all the non-canonical books of the Apocrypha. This translation was primarily for Hellenistic Jews living outside Palestine, and who had been influenced by Greek philosophy and mythology, and did not hold to a strict view of Scripture. Even the origin of the LXX is purely legendary.

There are many who claim that Jesus and His apostles used this corrupt Greek translation instead of the Hebrew Tanakh (Bible) (which is now represented in the Masoretic Text (MT, from which the Old Testament of the King James Bible, and other Reformation bibles) was translated. But that is highly unlikely.

The corruption of the Bible essentially means alterations to the text by scribes or heretics, either through additions, omissions, “corrections” (emendations), or transpositions. We will examine just Genesis chapter 5 to see how blatantly the Bible was corrupted. The Septuagint text is shown above the King James text in each instance, and the alteration has been bolded.

1. ONE HUNDRED YEARS ADDED BEFORE THE FIRSTBORN SON
3 And Adam lived two hundred and thirty years, and begot a son after his own form, and after his own image, and he called his name Seth.
3 And Adam lived an hundred and thirty years, and begat a son in his own likeness, after his image; and called his name Seth:
*****
6 Now Seth lived two hundred and five years, and begot Enos.
6 And Seth lived an hundred and five years, and begat Enos:
*****
9 And Enos lived an hundred and ninety years, and begot Cainan.
9 And Enos lived ninety years, and begat Cainan:
*****
12 And Cainan lived an hundred and seventy years, and he begot Maleleel.
12 And Cainan lived seventy years, and begat Mahalaleel:
******
15 And Maleleel lived an hundred and sixty and five years, and he begot Jared.
15 And Mahalaleel lived sixty and five years, and begat Jared:
*****
21 And Enoch lived an hundred and sixty and five years, and begat Mathusala.
21 And Enoch lived sixty and five years, and begat Methuselah:
*****
26 And Mathusala lived after his begetting Lamech eight hundred and two years, and begot sons and daughters.
26 And Methuselah lived after he begat Lamech seven hundred eighty and two years, and begat sons and daughters:
**************************
2. ONE HUNDRED YEARS SUBSTRACTED TO RETAIN THE SAME TOTAL
4 And the days of Adam, which he lived after his begetting Seth, were seven hundred years; and he begot sons and daughters.
4 And the days of Adam after he had begotten Seth were eight hundred years: and he begat sons and daughters:
*****
7 And Seth lived after his begetting Enos, seven hundred and seven years, and he begot sons and daughters.
7 And Seth lived after he begat Enos eight hundred and seven years, and begat sons and daughters:
*****
10 And Enos lived after his begetting Cainan, seven hundred and fifteen years, and he begot sons and daughters.
10 And Enos lived after he begat Cainan eight hundred and fifteen years, and begat sons and daughters:
*****
13 And Cainan lived after his begetting Maleleel, seven hundred and forty years, and he begot sons and daughters.
13 And Cainan lived after he begat Mahalaleel eight hundred and forty years, and begat sons and daughters:
*****
16 And Maleleel lived after his begetting Jared, seven hundred and thirty years, and he begot sons and daughters.
16 And Mahalaleel lived after he begat Jared eight hundred and thirty years, and begat sons and daughters:
***************

 

[Nehemiah6]

PART II

3. TOTAL YEARS RETAINED
5 And all the days of Adam which he lived were nine hundred and thirty years, and he died.
5 And all the days that Adam lived were nine hundred and thirty years: and he died.
*****
8 And all the days of Seth were nine hundred and twelve years, and he died.
8 And all the days of Seth were nine hundred and twelve years: and he died.
*****
11 And all the days of Enos were nine hundred and five years, and he died.
11 And all the days of Enos were nine hundred and five years: and he died.
*****
14 And all the days of Cainan were nine hundred and ten years, and he died.
14 And all the days of Cainan were nine hundred and ten years: and he died.
*****
17 And all the days of Maleleel were eight hundred and ninety and five years, and he died.
17 And all the days of Mahalaleel were eight hundred ninety and five years: and he died.
*****
23 And all the days of Enoch were three hundred and sixty and five years.
23 And all the days of Enoch were three hundred sixty and five years:
*****
27 And all the days of Mathusala which he lived, were nine hundred and sixty and nine years, and he died.
27 And all the days of Methuselah were nine hundred sixty and nine years: and he died.
**********************
4. GRATUITOUS CHANGES TO THE TEXT

A. 100 years shortened
22 And Enoch was well-pleasing to God after his begetting Mathusala, two hundred years, and he begot sons and daughters.
22 And Enoch walked with God after he begat Methuselah three hundred years, and begat sons and daughters:
************
B. 30 years shortened
30 And Lamech lived after his begetting Noe, five hundred and sixty and five years, and begot sons and daughters.
30 And Lamech lived after he begat Noah five hundred ninety and five years, and begat sons and daughters:
*****
C. 24 years shortened
31 And all the days of Lamech were seven hundred and fifty-three years, and he died.
31 And all the days of Lamech were seven hundred seventy and seven years: and he died.
*****
D. 20 years shortened
25 And Mathusala lived an hundred and sixty and seven years, and begot Lamech.
25 And Methuselah lived an hundred eighty and seven years, and begat Lamech:
*****
E. 6 years added
28 And Lamech lived an hundred and eighty and eight years, and begot a son.
28 And Lamech lived an hundred eighty and two years, and begat a son:
*****
F. Changes to the translation
24 And Enoch was well-pleasing to God, and was not found, because God translated him.
24 And Enoch walked with God: and he was not; for God took him.
*****
29 And he called his name Noe, saying, This one will cause us to cease from our works, and from the toils of our hands, and from the earth, which the Lord God has cursed.
29 And he called his name Noah, saying, This same shall comfort us concerning our work and toil of our hands, because of the ground which the LORD hath cursed.
*******************
5. TWO INSTANCES OF CORRESPONDENCE WITH MT
18 And Jared lived an hundred and sixty and two years, and begot Enoch:
18 And Jared lived an hundred sixty and two years, and he begat Enoch:
19 and Jared lived after his begetting Enoch, eight hundred years, and he begot sons and daughters.
19 And Jared lived after he begat Enoch eight hundred years, and begat sons and daughters:
20 And all the days of Jared were nine hundred and sixty and two years, and he died.
20 And all the days of Jared were nine hundred sixty and two years: and he died.
**********
6:1 And Noe was five hundred years old, and he begot three sons, Sem, Cham, and Japheth.
32 And Noah was five hundred years old: and Noah begat Shem, Ham, and Japheth.

Note: The passage has been taken from the English Translation of the Greek Septuagint Bible:
The Translation of the Greek Old Testament Scriptures, Including the Apocrypha.
Compiled from the Translation by Sir Lancelot C. L. Brenton 1851

 

[Angela53510]

I would have to differ on this. Yes there are differences in the Masoretic and Septuagint texts.

But in determining which is more accurate, remember the Masoretic text was put together, along with the Nikki Dots, (because the Hews were losing their ability to speak the language) around 800 AD!

The Septuagint was formally translated and written down in 350 BC. So, it has 1150 years less corruption. The Masoretic text was left to each Jewish village or conclave to preserve. That allows for a huge amount of time for corruption to sneak into its pages.

The Septuagint was also used about 80% of the time by Jesus and his disciples. The errors you speak of, plus minor variations were well known by the people of the 1st century, and Jesus himself chose to use the Greek version.

I read both a Hebrew and Greek, and I have translated from both the Masoretic and the Septuagint. The Greek is difficult, but it remains much more Western in thought, than the Hebrew version!

http://orthochristian.com/81224.html

"The Hebrew Text that has served as the basis for most translations of the Old Testament into English is based almost entirely on the Leningrad Codex, which dates from 1008 A.D. In comparison to the textual evidence that we have for the New Testament Greek text, this is a very late manuscript. It is an example of the Masoretic recension, which is usually dated to have been shaped between the 6th and 10th centuries A.D. This is well after the Septuagint was translated (3rd century before Christ), the Peshitta (1st and 2nd Centuries A.D.), or the Latin Vulgate (4th Century A.D.). According to Christian tradition, the non-Christian Jews began making changes in the Old Testament text to undercut the Christian use of Old Testament prophecies concerning the coming of Christ. In any case, the Hebrew Text that we now have was preserved outside the Church. The Septuagint and Peshitta texts were preserved within the Church, and so the Church believes that the text of the Old Testament was been authoritatively preserved in these textual traditions.

Furthermore, it is clear that the text that Christ and the Apostles used most closely matches the Septuagint rather than the Masoretic text. For example, in Acts 7:43, the Protomartyr Stephen quotes from the book of Amos as follows:

Yea, ye took up the tabernacle of Moloch, and the star of your god Remphan, figures which ye made to worship them (Acts 7:43 KJV).

But when you look this quote up in Amos 5:26 in most translations, you will find that the quotation doesn’t match:

You also carried Sikkuth your king and Chiun, your idols, the star of your gods, which you made for yourselves (NKJV).

Compare the above with the Latin Vulgate:

But you carried a tabernacle for your Moloch, and the image of your idols, the star of your god, which you made to yourselves (Douay-Rheims translation of the Vulgate).

And then with the Septuagint:

Yea, ye took up the tabernacle of Moloch, and the star of your god Raephan, the images of them which ye made for yourselves (Sir Lancelot Brenton translation of the Septuagint).

Also, there are several sections of the Hebrew text that are simply unreadable without keeping one eye on the Hebrew text and one eye on the Septuagint. For example, if you look at the footnotes for the book of Habbakuk in the NRSV there are 5 places in which it states that the Hebrew text is uncertain, and 3 times in which they state that they are simply translating from the Septuagint, Peshitta, and/or the Vulgate, because the Hebrew text is so unclear."

 

[Dino246]

Nehemiah, once again you have made the error of assuming that the KJV is the standard against which other texts are to be compared. According to the evidence presented, I could just as easily state that the KJV is corrupt, and you would have no defense without bringing in additional resources.

The KJV text is more familiar; that's all. I am certain that if you had grown up reading a translation of the LXX, that you would think the KJV were erroneous.

As it is, all you can say is that they are different, not which one is correct (if either).

 

[Whispered]

Nehemiah, once again you have made the error of assuming that the KJV is the standard against which other texts are to be compared. According to the evidence presented, I could just as easily state that the KJV is corrupt, and you would have no defense without bringing in additional resources.

The KJV text is more familiar; that's all. I am certain that if you had grown up reading a translation of the LXX, that you would think the KJV were erroneous.

As it is, all you can say is that they are different, not which one is correct (if either).

Good point.

"....That the Septuagint is the most authoritative text in the Orthodox Church is something that is confirmed in just about any Orthodox catechetical text you could consult. The Septuagint text is the text that the Church has preserved. The Masoretic text is a text that has not been preserved by the Church, and so while it is worthy of study and comparison, it is not equally trustworthy. We have the promise that the Holy Spirit will guide us into all Truth (John 16:13), and so can indeed affirm that."
Bible Beatdown! The Septuagint Text VS. The Masoretic TextSeptember 2, 2016 By Fr. John A. Peck

 

[John146]

PART I
The Septuagint (LXX) is the corrupted Greek translation of the Hebrew Tanakh (from about 200 BC), which also includes all the non-canonical books of the Apocrypha. This translation was primarily for Hellenistic Jews living outside Palestine, and who had been influenced by Greek philosophy and mythology, and did not hold to a strict view of Scripture. Even the origin of the LXX is purely legendary.

There are many who claim that Jesus and His apostles used this corrupt Greek translation instead of the Hebrew Tanakh (Bible) (which is now represented in the Masoretic Text (MT, from which the Old Testament of the King James Bible, and other Reformation bibles) was translated. But that is highly unlikely.

The corruption of the Bible essentially means alterations to the text by scribes or heretics, either through additions, omissions, “corrections” (emendations), or transpositions. We will examine just Genesis chapter 5 to see how blatantly the Bible was corrupted. The Septuagint text is shown above the King James text in each instance, and the alteration has been bolded.

1. ONE HUNDRED YEARS ADDED BEFORE THE FIRSTBORN SON
3 And Adam lived two hundred and thirty years, and begot a son after his own form, and after his own image, and he called his name Seth.
3 And Adam lived an hundred and thirty years, and begat a son in his own likeness, after his image; and called his name Seth:
*****
6 Now Seth lived two hundred and five years, and begot Enos.
6 And Seth lived an hundred and five years, and begat Enos:
*****
9 And Enos lived an hundred and ninety years, and begot Cainan.
9 And Enos lived ninety years, and begat Cainan:
*****
12 And Cainan lived an hundred and seventy years, and he begot Maleleel.
12 And Cainan lived seventy years, and begat Mahalaleel:
******
15 And Maleleel lived an hundred and sixty and five years, and he begot Jared.
15 And Mahalaleel lived sixty and five years, and begat Jared:
*****
21 And Enoch lived an hundred and sixty and five years, and begat Mathusala.
21 And Enoch lived sixty and five years, and begat Methuselah:
*****
26 And Mathusala lived after his begetting Lamech eight hundred and two years, and begot sons and daughters.
26 And Methuselah lived after he begat Lamech seven hundred eighty and two years, and begat sons and daughters:
**************************
2. ONE HUNDRED YEARS SUBSTRACTED TO RETAIN THE SAME TOTAL
4 And the days of Adam, which he lived after his begetting Seth, were seven hundred years; and he begot sons and daughters.
4 And the days of Adam after he had begotten Seth were eight hundred years: and he begat sons and daughters:
*****
7 And Seth lived after his begetting Enos, seven hundred and seven years, and he begot sons and daughters.
7 And Seth lived after he begat Enos eight hundred and seven years, and begat sons and daughters:
*****
10 And Enos lived after his begetting Cainan, seven hundred and fifteen years, and he begot sons and daughters.
10 And Enos lived after he begat Cainan eight hundred and fifteen years, and begat sons and daughters:
*****
13 And Cainan lived after his begetting Maleleel, seven hundred and forty years, and he begot sons and daughters.
13 And Cainan lived after he begat Mahalaleel eight hundred and forty years, and begat sons and daughters:
*****
16 And Maleleel lived after his begetting Jared, seven hundred and thirty years, and he begot sons and daughters.
16 And Mahalaleel lived after he begat Jared eight hundred and thirty years, and begat sons and daughters:
***************

Wow! I knew that it was corrupted but I’ve never seen these corruptions before. Thanks for sharing.

 

[John146]

Good point.

"....That the Septuagint is the most authoritative text in the Orthodox Church is something that is confirmed in just about any Orthodox catechetical text you could consult. The Septuagint text is the text that the Church has preserved. The Masoretic text is a text that has not been preserved by the Church, and so while it is worthy of study and comparison, it is not equally trustworthy. We have the promise that the Holy Spirit will guide us into all Truth (John 16:13), and so can indeed affirm that."
Bible Beatdown! The Septuagint Text VS. The Masoretic TextSeptember 2, 2016 By Fr. John A. Peck

Just compare fruits. KJV vs all new versions combined. Would God use a corrupted version of His word the way He used the KJV to bring about the greatest revival in world history? I think not. Thanks to the perverted new versions, we have the Laodicean Age.

 

[TooFastTurtle]

The Apostles quoted from it, this proves it is not corrupted.

There are verses that do not exist in the Hebrew being quoted in the book of Hebrews by a New Testament writer. "You have prepared for me a body" yet that is not found in any of the Hebrew Bible, only in the corrupted Septuagint

 

[Whispered]

Just as a reference for those who may be interested:
English Translation of the Greek Septuagint Bible
The Translation of the Greek Old Testament Scriptures, Including the Apocrypha.
Compiled from the Translation by Sir Lancelot C. L. Brenton 1851

Download the Septuagint in PDF.
The file is styled in a clean format so you can print the different Books of the LXX.

Read "An Historical Account of the Septuagint Version"

 

[Whispered]

Just compare fruits. KJV vs all new versions combined. Would God use a corrupted version of His word the way He used the KJV to bring about the greatest revival in world history? I think not. Thanks to the perverted new versions, we have the Laodicean Age.

I think before we consider the question of corrupted texts we have to ask ourselves if those who received the first Masoretic texts believed they were receiving perfect copies; no.

"....

Scribal emendations – Tikkune Soferim
Early rabbinic sources, from around 200 CE, mention several passages of Scripture in which the conclusion is inevitable that the ancient reading must have differed from that of the present text. . . . Rabbi Simon ben Pazzi (3rd century) calls these readings “emendations of the Scribes” (tikkune Soferim; Midrash Genesis Rabbah xlix. 7), assuming that the Scribes actually made the changes. This view was adopted by the later Midrash and by the majority of Masoretes.​

Masoretic Text vs. Original Hebrew

 

[John146]

I think before we consider the question of corrupted texts we have to ask ourselves if those who received the first Masoretic texts believed they were receiving perfect copies; no.

"....

Scribal emendations – Tikkune Soferim​

Early rabbinic sources, from around 200 CE, mention several passages of Scripture in which the conclusion is inevitable that the ancient reading must have differed from that of the present text. . . . Rabbi Simon ben Pazzi (3rd century) calls these readings “emendations of the Scribes” (tikkune Soferim; Midrash Genesis Rabbah xlix. 7), assuming that the Scribes actually made the changes. This view was adopted by the later Midrash and by the majority of Masoretes.​

Masoretic Text vs. Original Hebrew

A faithful witness will not lie. I’m not going on views and assumptions.

 

[Whispered]

A faithful witness will not lie. I’m not going on views and assumptions.

This thread began as such.

 

[John146]

This thread began as such.

What’s wrong with comparing fruit? Would God use an unfaithful witness to bring about such a revival?

 

[presidente]

Why does Hebrews quote verses that are in the LXX but not the Masoretic text (MT)?

James goes with different vowels than the points in the MT. The MT points Psalm 22 to be about lions instead of "They have pierced My hands and My feet."

 

[Dino246]

Just compare fruits. KJV vs all new versions combined. Would God use a corrupted version of His word the way He used the KJV to bring about the greatest revival in world history? I think not. Thanks to the perverted new versions, we have the Laodicean Age.

That is NOT the method by which you judge a text; it is the method by which you judge a person!

 

[Dino246]

A faithful witness will not lie. I’m not going on views and assumptions.

Yawn; you really need to stop using bad arguments to support your KJV-only position.

 

[JamOn]

The Apostles quoted from it, this proves it is not corrupted.

There are verses that do not exist in the Hebrew being quoted in the book of Hebrews by a New Testament writer. "You have prepared for me a body" yet that is not found in any of the Hebrew Bible, only in the corrupted Septuagint

Well there is about nine missing books mentioned in the Hebrews OT, no one knows when they went missing. Looking at the days of creation, if one reads day four before day three then all the days seem to flow correctly, there’s no grass before the sun and the lights are place in firmament that was mentioned on day two.

 

[John146]

That is NOT the method by which you judge a text; it is the method by which you judge a person!

Of course you’re right, because this would clearly decide the superiority of the KJV.

 

[John146]

Yawn; you really need to stop using bad arguments to support your KJV-only position.

That’s actual Scripture.

Psalm 14:5 A faithful witness will not lie: but a false witness will utter lies.

 

[Dino246]

That’s actual Scripture.

Psalm 14:5 A faithful witness will not lie: but a false witness will utter lies.

Yes, it's Scripture; I know that. The problem is your fallacious application. Hopefully one day you'll see your circular reasoning from the outside.