What OT Bible Did Jesus/Apostles Use?

[AV Defender]

Here are a few references.

Here is a few reasons WHY the existance of a pre-Christian Septuagint is nothing but baloney;I have posted these before,but for your edification,I will post them again:

1)The sole custodians of the Old Testament Scripture was the Levites,according to Deuteronomy 17:18;31:25-26,and Malichi 2:7.

2)God ordered his name NOT to be spoken of in the land of Egypt by the Jews,Jeremiah 44:26.Bear in mind,the people who were supposed to compile this halucination known as the LXX,were JEWISH.

3)No extant copies of the mysterious LXX can be produced that were compiled any earlier than 200 A.D.

4)The 72 Jewish(Jeremiah 44:26)scholars would have had to ADD the Popish Apocryphal books to this non-existant,pre-Christian Greek Old Testament BEFORE they were even written.

5)According to Jeremiah 44:26,Philo,Aquilla,and Symmachus had no buisness in Egypt.

6)The LXX was PLAINLY an attempt by the indiviguals in Romans 11:20-25 and Jeremiah 33:24 to replace the inspired "oracles of God" with the conjectures of Alexandrian Greek philosophy.

7)No one has yet to produce one Manuscript written before the time of Christ that is a pre-Christian Greek old testament.So produce said manuscript,or let it rest!

(I am assuming a good working knowledge of Greek and Hebrew. If you don't, then SHUT UP about something you know nothing about and are only parroting the load given to you by your guru)

A lot of people do not have a "good working knowledge of Greek and Hebrew," so what? Are you trying to say that just because a person does not have a "good working knowledge of Greek and Hebrew" that they are poor,uninformed,superstitious dolts for believing in a perfect Bible? A great many people do have a "good working knowledge of Greek and Hebrew" and are Bible-believers that want to better inform those who do not;without trying to BULLY them out of their faith in the KJB.(John 16:13) However,there are many people(including some on here) that have a "good working knowledge of Greek and Hebrew" that place them selves a little higher than the poor,unlearned,superstitious, layman because they are "ever learning." But 2 Timothy 3:7).

 

[Pastor Larry]

Originally posted by AV Defender:
1)The sole custodians of the Old Testament Scripture was the Levites,according to Deuteronomy 17:18;31:25-26,and Malichi 2:7.

So??? This doesn't mean that someone after the close of the OT canon and during the silent years could not have translated the Scriptures.

2)God ordered his name NOT to be spoken of in the land of Egypt by the Jews,Jeremiah 44:26.Bear in mind,the people who were supposed to compile this halucination known as the LXX,were JEWISH.

This is a misuse of Scripture. There is no evidence in Jeremiah 44 that it is referring to translation. The misuse of Scripture is embarrassing. When you say things God doesn't, you make him into a liar.

3)No extant copies of the mysterious LXX can be produced that were compiled any earlier than 200 A.D.

Several comments. First, this is untrue. There are several fragments of Scripture from a Greek translation that are unquestionably BC. That is undeniable evidence that you are wrong. Second, these 200AD copies mean that the original LXX only preceded them by 400 or so years. The Greek NT you follow has no predecessors for until the originals for over 1500 years. So you reject something over 400 years and accept it over 1500 years. That is inconsistent and shows the fallacy of your argumentation about the Greek NT.

4)The 72 Jewish(Jeremiah 44:26)scholars would have had to ADD the Popish Apocryphal books to this non-existant,pre-Christian Greek Old Testament BEFORE they were even written.

Nonsense and irrelevant.

5)According to Jeremiah 44:26,Philo,Aquilla,and Symmachus had no buisness in Egypt.

I see no reference in Jeremiah 44 to Philo, Aquilla, and Symmachus. Yet another gross misuse of Scripture.

6)The LXX was PLAINLY an attempt by the indiviguals in Romans 11:20-25 and Jeremiah 33:24 to replace the inspired "oracles of God" with the conjectures of Alexandrian Greek philosophy.

Nonsense. Think of yet another embarrassing failure of logic. You say that the LXX was not translated until 200AD, some 200 years after the individuals in Rom 11 lived and some 800 years after those in Jeremiah lived. Would you really have us believe that people this old were making translations?? Furthermore, there is no replacing of the oracles of God with Greek philosophy. That is simply an uninformed opinion on your part. Get our your LXX and read it. You will see what I am saying.

7)No one has yet to produce one Manuscript written before the time of Christ that is a pre-Christian Greek old testament.So produce said manuscript,or let it rest!

You already registered this objection several times and it was wrong every other time you registered it. It is wrong yet again. There are parts of manuscripts that are Pre-Christian Greek copies of the OT.

So once again, every objection you level fails on the basis of real fact. You have simply shown again that you have a careless disregard for the truth.

A lot of people do not have a "good working knowledge of Greek and Hebrew," so what? Are you trying to say that just because a person does not have a "good working knowledge of Greek and Hebrew" that they are poor,uninformed,superstitious dolts for believing in a perfect Bible? A great many people do have a "good working knowledge of Greek and Hebrew" and are Bible-believers that want to better inform those who do not;without trying to BULLY them out of their faith in the KJB.(John 16:13) However,there are many people(including some on here) that have a "good working knowledge of Greek and Hebrew" that place them selves a little higher than the poor,unlearned,superstitious, layman because they are "ever learning." But 2 Timothy 3:7).

For someone to speak authorititavely on this subject as you are trying to do, it is important to know what you are talking about. If you do not have a good working knowledge of Greek and Hebrew, you simply cannot know what you are talking about. That doesn't make you unsaved, unable to study Scripture, unlearned, a dolt, or anything else. It simply means that you are unqualified to speak on this subject to the degree that you are trying to speak on it. Learn the facts and quit repeating this nonsense you heard from someone else.

 

[Anti-Alexandrian]

I see no reference in Jeremiah 44 to Philo, Aquilla, and Symmachus. Yet another gross misuse of Scripture.

Not if you would try looking into WHAT those three men were;they were JEWS.The Scripture(KJB)is CORRECT!!

 

[mioque]

Have certain participants of this thread eyesightproblems or something

Click on the links of my last post and you can see photographs of fragments of the LXX all written before Jezus was born.
what more evidence does one need

 

[Forever settled in heaven]

Originally posted by AV Defender:
6)The LXX was PLAINLY an attempt by the indiviguals in Romans 11:20-25 and Jeremiah 33:24 to replace the inspired "oracles of God" with the conjectures of Alexandrian Greek philosophy.

then why don't u correct Askjo n Nverist n others of ur KJBO belief when they say the LXX cldn't be pre-Christian?

u see, the "indiviguals" who purportedly "replaced" the oracles in Jeremiah (33:24) live way BEFORE the NT.

i never cease to be amazed ...

THANKS FOR THE "EVIDENCE"!!!

 

[Pastor Larry]

Originally posted by MV-neverist:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr /> I see no reference in Jeremiah 44 to Philo, Aquilla, and Symmachus. Yet another gross misuse of Scripture.

Not if you would try looking into WHAT those three men were;they were JEWS.The Scripture(KJB)is CORRECT!! </font>[/QUOTE]On the last point you are correct. The KJV is correct. However, on your prior point, you are wrong. Jeremiah does not address that issue. Study the context of Jeremiah 44 in teh KJV and you will see that you are still wrong on this. What will it take for you to become serious about the word of God?? How long will you continue to mistreat it so??

 

[Askjo]

Originally posted by mioque:
Askjo, MV-neverist.
You want to see an example of LXX from before the birth of Christ? You are in luck!

http://ccat.sas.upenn.edu/rs/rak/lxxpryl458.jpg
2nd bce (Deuteronomy 23-28)

http://ccat.sas.upenn.edu/rs/rak/lxx4qdeut.jpg
2nd bce (Deuteronomium 11)

http://ccat.sas.upenn.edu/rs/rak/lxx7qex.jpg
2nd/1st bce(Exodus 28)

http://ccat.sas.upenn.edu/rs/rak/lxx4qleva.jpg
+/- 100 bce(Leviticus 26)

These are images without the explanation.

 

[Pastor Larry]

Originally posted by Askjo:
These are images without the explanation.

What's to explain?? Your side asked for evidence of a BC Greek translation of the OT. This is the evidence. Put your eyes on it and read it. It shows that those who claim there is not BC LXX are wrong.

 

[Anti-Alexandrian]

What's to explain?? Your side asked for evidence of a BC Greek translation of the OT. This is the evidence. Put your eyes on it and read it. It shows that those who claim there is not BC LXX are wrong.

That handfull of fragments do NOT constitute or even confirm a BC Septuagint;what about a complete BC LXX? The only ones available are Sinaiticus and Vaticanus from Origens fifth collum.Which,by the way,are dated 200 to 300 years AFTER the close of the NT canon. Why are you so concerned about a BC Greek old testament anyway?When most on this board will quickly tell me there is no inspired translation anywhere.Why are you dead set on giving the Greeks(1 Cor 1-3) credit for the OT "oracles of God"(Rom 3:2)?

 

[Pastor Larry]

Originally posted by MV-neverist:
That handfull of fragments do NOT constitute or even confirm a BC Septuagint;what about a complete BC LXX?

False ... They affirm the existence of a Greek translation of the OT prior to the time of Christ which show your assertions to be false.

The only ones available are Sinaiticus and Vaticanus from Origens fifth collum.Which,by the way,are dated 200 to 300 years AFTER the close of the NT canon.

So?? The only available TR dates some 1400 years after the close of the NT yet you have no difficulty affirming that it existed prior to that. You are inconsistent and have shown that you are not interested in the truth and truthfulness of your positions.

Why are you so concerned about a BC Greek old testament anyway?[/qutoe]I am not concerned about it per se. I am concerned about those who may be mislead by your false teaching. When truth is attacked, we need to stand up and be heard and to show the evidence. We have done that.

Why are you dead set on giving the Greeks(1 Cor 1-3) credit for the OT "oracles of God"(Rom 3:2)?

I am not and no one is. We have the oracles of God in the Hebrew OT. We also have a translation of them in the Greek OT. But here again you show a great inconsistency. You are perfectly willing to give Anglicans credit for the oracles of God in English. Why are you not willing to give Greeks credit for the oracles of God in Greek?? It shows yet again that you hold an unthinking position that merely parrots out the mustruths that you have been fed by listening to the wrong teachers.

 

[Ransom]

Askjo said:

These are images without the explanation.

which, being interpreted, means "Don't bother me with the facts; my mind is already made up."

 

[Ransom]

"AV Defender" said:

6)The LXX was PLAINLY an attempt by the indiviguals in Romans 11:20-25 and Jeremiah 33:24 to replace the inspired "oracles of God" with the conjectures of Alexandrian Greek philosophy.

Jeremiah was written in the 6th century B.C. I thought you were arguing that it could not have existed before the Christian era? Now you are saying that Jeremiah wrote about people who corrupted it, 600 years before the fact.

Oh, man, you gotta laugh.

 

[gb93433]

anyone who considers the issue of wars and what they did with the people also knows that a dispersion occured. In a dispersion the people lost their old culture and language. In this the Jews would have lost their cutlure/customs and language. They would have adapted to their modern culture of Greek and lost their past of Hebrew. So it was necessary for a Greek translation of the OT.