The Gentile Bible

in a sense, all translations since the LXX have been Gentile Bibles. of course, some Jews who cldn't read their Hebrew read these translations in the Gentile tongue, too, but there was no necessity to chop out any part of the canon. in fact, the funny thing is that some Gentile BIbles have continued to contain the JEWISH apocrypha on top of the OT n NT.

but i agree w many who've said that the NT makes no sense without the OT. after all, isn't ALL Scripture given by inspiration for instruction n the thorough equipping of the saints?

 

in a sense, all translations since the LXX have been Gentile Bibles. of course, some Jews who cldn't read their Hebrew read these translations in the Gentile tongue, too, but there was no necessity to chop out any part of the canon. in fact, the funny thing is that some Gentile BIbles have continued to contain the JEWISH apocrypha on top of the OT n NT.</font>[/QUOTE]Compare Jeremiah in LXX to Jeremiah in the Masoretic text, and you'll see that the LXX is not simply a "translation of the Hebrew text"; of course, there may have been a Hebrew text LXX Jeremiah was translated from (the DSS etc. include Hebrew scrolls closer to the LXX than to the Masoretes), but the differences are far greater than mere "translation" could account for (sort of the mirror image of the Esther situation).

Haruo