Featured Translating OT from Septuagint

Perhaps this is missing the obvious, but is the contention here that Origen destroyed all earlier copies of LXX, or that there was only the one to which his edits were made in copying and then that one destroyed?

Again, where are the extant Jewish-controlled versions of the Greek kept?

 

It is a very detailed and complexed study which I started a few years ago but have mislaid my notes. The 3 2nd century works are preserved in critical editions of the LXX which I have. I am more interested in the Hebrew text and the DSS to some extent. This whole area of study is very time consuming

 

Origen was a preserver of texts, not a destroyer at all. In Origens Septuagint collum he made marks indicating things in the Hebrew but not in the Greek. He also made marks indicating things in the Greek but not in the Hebrew. Later copiers misunderstanding the marks did not accurately copy the marks blending the two.

 

Jerome who was one of the greatest Biblical scholars disagrees with your assumptions. And he should know better

 

Jerome is the one who I got the above information from!

 

AFAICT so far, the matter isn't merely complex but highly contentious, involving voices from the Latin west, the Greek east, and the Hebrew diaspora, all of which have a dogma in the fight.

 

Can you share what you have from Jerome where he says Origens LXX work is reliable

 

what has this got to do with textual studies? Thayer's Greek lexicon is one of the most widely used by Evangelical Christians, and he was a Unitarian and denies the Deity of Jesus and the Holy Spirit? Desiderius Erasmus' Greek text is the basis of many a English version, and this guy was not "Evengeilcal"!

 

The point is, or should be, that credentials, even of a prophet, are not sufficient authority. Everything must be tested. Some experts may not like this, but everyone is subject to bias and logical fallacy in their views and arguments. This is a fundamental principle for those seeking truth.

 

Look at it this way. What would be the most valuable of all to Textual Criticism of The Old Testament. Origens Hexapla. Even if we only had his Septuagint column with obelisks and asterisks intact we would have the original Septuagint from at least Origens day. Origen did not corrupt it. He left marks behind (as Jerome said) but later copyist misunderstood the marks and did not accurately copy them. That's where the corruption came in. When Jerome said origen corrupted it, it was in response to Augustine asking why he didn't use Origens Septuagint column. In otherwords he used propaganda for a lack of better terms.

Correspondence of Augustine and Jerome concerning the Latin Translation of the Scriptures

 

I believe that is false witness about Thayer. People seem to trace it back to Green only.

 

If I'm reading this correctly, Jerome states that Origen included in his Greek version in his Hexapla "obelisks" indicating where LXX exceeds the Hebrew and also "asterisks" indicating where Theodotion exceeded the Hebrew. Furthermore, nearly all of the extant library copies of the time already contained the latter. Jerome thus indicated that LXX had already been widely corrupted by the inclusion of these Theodotion additions. In other words, per Jerome, what is termed LXX is not really, unless those Theodotion additions are removed.

So, my question is, does what is called LXX today have those Theodotion additions, or have they been removed? Do we have both versions?

 

The goal I believe in Septuagint Textual Criticism would be the Old Greek, the original translation, or even translations from the 3rd/2nd century BC. I believe we have mixes and different translations at different times. I think we only have part of a Syraic translation that preserves the asterisks/obelisks. It sure goes deeper than just a Origen LXX and Theodotions additions I believe.

 

If those additions have been removed then we would have Origens LXX. I do not believe that we do in a pure form.

 

Perhaps this BibleHub excerpt on Origen helps explain Augustine's reluctance to adopt Jerome's position (there is considerably more information available through the link):

...
It was Origen's belief, and he was not alone in his opinion (cf. Justin Martyr's Dial. with Trypho, chap. 71), that the Hebrew Old Testament had been seriously altered by the Jews, and that the LXX (an inspired translation, as it was commonly held to be by the Christians) alone represented the true form of Scripture. For two centuries before and more than a century after Christ the LXX stood in high repute among the Jews, even in Palestine, and outside of Palestine had almost completely taken the place of the original Hebrew. Under the influence of its universal use among the Jews the Christians adopted it, and looked upon it as inspired Scripture just as truly as if it had been in the original tongue. Early in the second century (as Schürer points out) various causes were at work to lessen its reputation among the Jews. Chief among these were first, the growing conservative reaction against all non-Hebraic culture, which found its culmination in the Rabbinic schools of the second century; and second, the ever-increasing hostility to Christianity. The latter cause tended to bring the LXX into disfavor with the Jews, because it was universally employed by the Christians, and was cited in favor of Christian doctrines in many cases where it differed from the Hebrew text, which furnished less support to the particular doctrine defended. It was under the influence of this reaction against the LXX, which undoubtedly began even before the second century, that the various versions already mentioned took their rise.
...

Origen's Earnest Study of the Divine Scriptures.​

 

The ONLY Fundamental principle for those who are seeking Bible Truth, is the Guiding of the Holy Spirit in all that we do. As He ALONE is able to teach us what Truth really is!

 

because of the state of the LXX text at the time of Jerome, and the numerous variant reading, Jerome perferred the OT Greek version by Symmachus, which is found in the fourth colum in Origen's Hexapla, which he used for the Latin Vulgate. This Greek OT is from the 2nd century A.D., and one of three, the others being that by Aquila and Theodotion