sotto voce

Is this some sort of jest? Diaspora Jews make themselves a translation of their own religious text, because they no longer use the original language, and that's hi-jacking? Just who is the owner of the vehicle, in this case? Do languages come with copyright?

Christians didn't distort the Jewish texts, if that's what you think. The LXX was written long before Jesus, by Jews, and it was thereafter used by Jews, who came to depend upon it. Despite its many deficiencies, they did not regard it as a hi-jack.

mountainman

They invented the nomina sacra in the LXX and NT, or so I heard.

They certainly distorted other Jewish texts. Eusebius's distortion of Josephus may be the tip of an iceberg of Christain distortions.
The 1st century author Philo was "Christianised". Momigliano cites a number of other examples.





I do not buy the BCE Ptolemaic legend for the Greek LXX. It stinks of Eusebian chronological propaganda. There is little or no unambiguous evidence for its existence until Origen's "Hexapla" in the 3rd century CE. What legends evidence are your chronological claims above actually based upon?

sotto voce

Eusebius was as Christian as Pol Pot.





Ok, so let's say that Christians wrote the LXX. In what way did they misrepresent the Hebrew text in order to suit their own agenda?

And what does it have to do with the OP video, anyway?

sotto voce

Or so you heard.


:hobbyhorse:

Try sticking somewhere near the topic.

mountainman

My research leads me to suspect that the Greek LXX may have been assembled as late as Origen the Platonist (not Origen the Christian). The Platonist Origen may have been Jewish, and had access to a number of manuscript versions. This Origen had no agenda other than to make a good Greek translation of the genuinely ancient Hebrew Bible. See the Hexapla.


Much later, Eusebius inherited the library of this Origen, and may have hijacked the LXX as a genuinely Old Source. From this LXX (and other sources like Homer), he may have assembled the NT. His publisher certainly bound the new and the old together into a lavish codex.

The new and strange pulpit business was pumping.

sotto voce

Is it, now. I am beginning to suspect that the objections made in the OP video are no more valid than the few so far presented. Now if there is no evidence that the LXX fixed the Tanakh for Christians, and I for one have never come across that notion, can we assume that the thread is now closed?

Or will someone again quote the video, for yet more genuine interest?

DoubtingDave

Take a look at this page. It is apparent that the Bible contradicts itself on the matter of how many went into Egypt. Some Christians suggest that Stephen is using the LXX. However, the LXX contradicts itself. Genesis and Exodus say 75; however, the Christians corrupted that part. How do we know? Because the current LXX contradicts itself. In 3 places do we find the number that went to egypt. 75 in Genesis and Exodus in the LXX; but in Deuteronomy, it is 70 -- a clear contradiction.

sotto voce

What does this have to do with Christians? They were not responsible for the LXX and its variants.

Diogenes the Cynic

Sotto, can you tell us what you believe is the clearest prophecy of Jesus in Hebrew Scripture. Give me the very best you've got.

DoubtingDave

It shows they had a motivation for the change. It also shows the LXX is very sloppy as a translation.