Steven Carr

As is known, the Gospel writers used the mistaken translations of the LXX quite often, as in Acts 15, which should have had remnant of 'Edom' , if the LXX had translated the Hebrew accurately.

So the LXX is not always reliable.

andrewcriddle

A typical example from Philo is 'On the Unchangeableness of God' which is based on 1 Samuel particularly 2:5.

There is really little relevant direct evidence apart from Philo Josephus and the NT.

(Indirect evidence might be that the Hebrew basis for the translation is non-Masoretic in a way that many scholars would think fits the period before 70 CE rather than the period after.)
IMHO Josephus' statement is part of an introduction explaining to possible buyers why his book is worth reading.

It is therefore understandable that he should emphasise the novelty of his work, and give the impression that he is providing something entirely new.

Strictly speaking Josephus does not say that there have been no previous Greek versions of the historical books, however by making clear that the translation for King Ptolemy included only the Torah and not mentioning any later translations he is able without positive falsehood to give an exaggerated impression of his originality.

(I'm not sure this is the right explanation but it is my best guess.)

Andrew Criddle

Steven Avery

Hi Steven,

If you review the thread, you will see that what you claim as "well known" is exactly what I am contending is simply a rather trivial common fallacy, although I will definitely agree with "the LXX is not always reliable", considering that a severe understatement. (Especially as there is no such thing as 'the LXX', with widely varying readings amongst the various GreekOT).

Acts 15:15-17
And to this agree the words of the prophets; as it is written, After this I will return, and will build again the tabernacle of David, which is fallen down; and I will build again the ruins thereof, and I will set it up: That the residue of men might seek after the Lord, and all the Gentiles, upon whom my name is called, saith the Lord, who doeth all these things.

First of all, allow me to point out that Josephus confirms this as a Messianic prophecy http://josephus.yorku.ca/pdf/nodet2000.pdf
JEWISH FEATURES IN THE “SLAVONIC� WAR OF JOSEPHUS (Pg 7)
Since so often such NT ideas are considered as Christian exegesis only :-)
Even Ibn Ezra, in later rabbinics, allows for this to be Messianic. Midrash Rabbah and Sanhedrin 98b in the Talmud also have fascinating references.

Now, notice that this is a general "words of the prophets", not one verse, and you can see an excellent exegesis from John Gill.
http://eword.gospelcom.net/comments/...ill/acts15.htm
"the Apostle James quotes it (Amos), and applies it to the first times of the Gospel" "those nations that have been the greatest enemies to Christ and his Gospel, signified by Edom, shall be converted, and call upon the name of the Lord, and worship him"

Here are two of the principle prophets involved in the Acts midrash.
(Some more I put at bottom.)

Amos 9;11-12
In that day
will I raise up the tabernacle of David
that is fallen,
and close up the breaches thereof;
and I will raise up his ruins,
and I will build it as in the days of old:
That they may possess the remnant of Edom, and of all the heathen,
which are called by my name, saith the LORD that doeth this.

Zephaniah 3:9
For then will I turn to the people a pure language,
that they may all call upon the name of the LORD,
to serve him with one consent.
http://www.lcms.org/graphics/assets/...y1_present.pdf
The Mission of Proclaiming...WHAT Gospel? - Dr. Jeff Gibbs
.. the citation is a combination of references that probably allude in a secondary way to Hosea 3, Jeremiah 12, and Isaiah 45 as well as to Amos 9. Second, in five places where the LXX is a faithful translation of the Hebrew text, James' citation differs from both of them....Richard Bauckham, "Even the MT [of Amos 9] could easily have been understood by a Jewish Christian as predicting the extension of Israel's covenant status and privileges to the Gentile nations..."

Richard Bauckham in _History, Literature and Society in the Book of Acts_, ... lays out a convincing case for a very sophisticated kind of interpretive citation going on here.- Jon Weatherly Cincinnati Bible Seminary b-greek 1997

There is simply no apologetic or midrashic difficulty in this verse whatsoever, when we work with the Hebrew Bible and the New Testament.

Afaik the GreekOT reading that is "closer" pops up manuscript-wise in the 4th century, without OT manuscript support anywhere earlier, not in the
DSS,
Targum
Aramaic Peshitta
Vulgate
(Not sure about any church writers, nor of variants in the Greek OT).

Such orphan readings are excellent examples of occam razor "smoothing" of the corrupt GreekOT, (by the very faulty egytpian/alexandrian copyists .. e.g. see the "fool and knave" note in Vaticanus), to match the NT.

No more, no less.

Skeptics and infidels especially should be able to understand this, since they could look at textual corruption, especially of Vaticanus and Sinaiticus, texts replete with blunders and errors and corruptions, without the bias and illusions of 'modern scientific textcrit'.

Shalom,
Praxeus
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Messianic_Apologetic/

Isaiah 45:7-8
I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things.
Drop down, ye heavens, from above, and let the skies pour down righteousness: let the earth open, and let them bring forth salvation, and let righteousness spring up together; I the LORD have created it.

Hosea 3:5
afterward shall the children of Israel return, and seek the LORD their God,and David their king; and shall fear the LORD and his goodness in the latter days.

Jeremiah 12:14
Thus saith the LORD against all mine evil neighbors, that touch the inheritance which I have caused my people Israel to inherit; Behold, I will pluck them out of their land, and pluck out the house of Judah from among them. And it shall come to pass, after that I have plucked them out I will return, and have compassion on them, and will bring them again, every man to his heritage, and every man to his land.

Isaiah 43:1-7 (see whole chapter)
Even every one that is called by my name: for I have created him for my glory,
I have formed him; yea, I have made him

Isaiah 65:1
I am sought of them that asked not for me; I am found of them that sought me not: I said,
Behold me, behold me, unto a nation that was not called by my name. .

Additional reference

http://www.oceansideurc.org/sections...ationalist.htm
Was the Prophet Amos a Dispensationalist?
The Fulfillment of Amos 9:8-12 in Acts 15 - Rev. Daniel R. Hyde, B.A., M.Div.
"the inspired Apostle is interpreting the text as he quotes it in the presence of the Synod. Thus "after these things" is the day in which the Council met as Amos 9:8-10 had already happened in the destruction and diaspora of Israel."

Chris Weimer

Sorry, Wallener. I was still referring to Praxeus when I made that comment, not you. In fact, if you go back and read the excerpt about 4QPaleoExod, you'll see where the Samaritan fits in.

Steven Avery

Are we switching away from the socalled LXX issues and into the Samaritan Pentateuch as a contender for the primary Tanach? That probably should be its own thread. First, it only relates to Pentateuch. And its differences are really with all manuscripts, and I doubt that the DSS helped the Samaritan unique readings at all (the big debate about the Samaritian Pentateuch took place before the DSS). There are issues of how old it is, how corrupt it is, and the places where it agrees with the MT or GreekOT, or both, or neither. I've looked over the chronology differences some, a while back. Not really much help on this thread, imho. Personally, I consider the SP of minor interest, although I don't mind discussing it in some detail and learning more.

Shalom,
Praxeus
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Messianic_Apologetic/

spin

Among the DSS there are traces of all three major textual traditions plus numerous other variations. A non-specifically Samaritan text tradition existed in the DSS that appears to lie behind the Samaritan version of the books of the torah, just as there are LXX type texts in Hebrew as well.

The Samaritan oral tradition, as in the mainstream Hebrew oral tradition, is not worth the paper it is written on.


spin