Septuagint

[Van]

They may have well been copying copies of copies. But they were excellent copies existing in the 1st century AD. They were far more accurate than what has come to us . There are no errors originally in the New Testament. That includes quotations of the Old Covenant into the New Covenants writings. The Apostles and their companions had far more accurate manuscript than what has come down to us in the later Masoretic Tradition as well as our Septuagint Manuscripts.

More nonsense, the Dead Sea Scrolls proved that our copies today are very close to the copies available near the first century.

Your claim the Greek NT references were exactly what the original OT autographs in Hebrew where is something you made up.

 

[Conan]

More nonsense, the Dead Sea Scrolls proved that our copies today are very close to the copies available near the first century.

Your claim the Greek NT references were exactly what the original OT autographs in Hebrew where is something you made up.

The Dead Sea Scrolls prove that all Text types existed side by side in the 1st century AD. The Septuagint, the pre-Masoretic Text, the Samaritan and some independents not exactly aligned with the others. The Apostles and their companions used the Original Text in the New Testament writings . It was usually closer to the Septuagint than Masoretic text, but not always.

 

[Logos1560]

While during the period 200 B. C. until 100 A. D., there existed a proto-Masoretic Hebrew text that was later standardized into the post-A. D. 800 Masoretic Text, the Dead Sea Scrolls provide clear evidence that there also existed another Hebrew text that is the presumed Hebrew source for the old Greek Septuagint.

James VanderKam and Peter Flint maintained that ‘the many biblical scrolls can be placed in one of our textual categories: (a) similar to the Masoretic Text, (b) similar to the Hebrew text translated by the Septuagint, (c) similar to the Samaritan Pentateuch, and (d) mixed or non-aligned (showing no consistent alignment with any of the other three)” (Meaning of the Dead Sea Scrolls, p. 140). Yosef Ofer wrote: “The three most important ancient sources for the text of Scripture are the Dead Sea Scrolls, the Septuagint and the Samaritan version of the Torah” (Masora on Scripture, p. 170). Yosef Ofer observed: “We find a variety of versions in the Dead Sea Scrolls. All three types of text that are known from different witnesses—the ‘masoretic type’, the ‘Septuagint type’ and the ‘Samaratin type’ (for the Torah)—are represented in the scrolls, and there may even be additional types and sub-types” (p. 176).

 

[Van]

The Dead Sea Scrolls prove that all Text types existed side by side in the 1st century AD. The Septuagint, the pre-Masoretic Text, the Samaritan and some independents not exactly aligned with the others. The Apostles and their companions used the Original Text in the New Testament writings . It was usually closer to the Septuagint than Masoretic text, but not always.

Once again, you said the copies available in the first century were "far more accurate" when the Dead Sea Scrolls prove our copies existing today are very close to the copies available in the 1st century.

 

[Conan]

Once again, you said the copies available in the first century were "far more accurate" when the Dead Sea Scrolls prove our copies existing today are very close to the copies available in the 1st century.

Do you acknowledge the differences in the Dead Sea Scrolls ? See post # 43 on this thread.

 

[Van]

Do you acknowledge the differences in the Dead Sea Scrolls ? See post # 43 on this thread.

Yet another dodge. If you are unwilling to acknowledge error, you should evaluate. Your witness might not be effectual if controlled by pride.

Returning to topic. Sometimes the NT writers seem to quote or paraphrase the Septuagint, and at other times a Hebrew version. I believe the inspired choice is made to best convey the NT purpose.

 

[Logos1560]

Some have claimed that the B. C. Great Isaiah scroll of the Dead Sea Scrolls is identical to the Hebrew Masoretic Text. Overall generally the Great Isaiah scroll has the same Hebrew text, but it is not 100% identical.

KJV defender Douglas Somerset wrote: “The ‘Great Isaiah scroll’ (Isaiah A or 1QIsa) has a broadly Masoretic consonantal text but it differs from Masoretic in about 2,600 places” (Hooper, It Is Written, p. 244). Douglas Somerset maintained that Isaiah A “has much fuller spelling (which is of little consequence); adds or omits occasional words; shows some variation of singular/plural; omits verses 2:9b and 2:10; gives a shortened version of verse 40:7” (Ibid.). Yosef Ofer wrote: “Comparing the text of the first Isaiah scroll to that of the Masoretic text, we find no less than 14 differences of various kinds” (Masora on Scripture, p. 171).

Douglas Somerset wrote: “Much closer to the Masoretic consonantal text of Isaiah is the incomplete Isaiah B (1QIsb). For example, ignoring spellings, there are four differences in Isaiah 53, including one extra word in the Hebrew. That occurs in v. 11, where the word ‘light’ is added to give, ‘he shall give light.’ Isaiah A and the Septuagint also have the word ‘light’” (Hooper, It Is Written, p. 245). Yosef Ofer wrote: “The version of the second Isaiah scroll is closer to that of the Masoretic text, and in this sample [Isaiah 58:4-6] there are only nine differences between the two” (Masora, p. 171).

 

[Conan]

Yet another dodge

It's not a dodge at all. You seemed to deny or not have the knowledge that the Dead Sea Scrolls represented pre-Masoretic Text, Septuagint, Samaritan and other independent Texts.

. If you are unwilling to acknowledge error, you should evaluate. Your witness might not be effectual if controlled by pride.

Returning to topic. Sometimes the NT writers seem to quote or paraphrase the Septuagint, and at other times a Hebrew version. I believe the inspired choice is made to best convey the NT purpose.

Or they were Quoting Scripture. Sometimes the only Original. Sometimes Both Masoretic Text and the Septuagint is not as good as it should be. But the exact wording is preserved in the New Testament. The New Testament is always correct.

 

[Ascetic X]

It is God’s Word. He watches over it. People can get saved and follow Jesus, even when they use a Bible with poor translations and textual errors in it. But it is good to try to identify the most accurate versions. I enjoy using 12 different versions.