S
SentLarry
Guest
What are the clues that Jesus knew about and used the Septuagint?
- Status
N
NotWorthy
Guest
Maybe the fact that the vast majority of his Scripture Quotes were from the Septuagint.
NotWorthy
NotWorthy
D
DaveBj
Guest
The quotes are in Greek because the writers were writing in Greek for Greek-speakers, and the LXX was the handy Greek source. Why would Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, Paul, etc., make a fresh translation into Greek from the Hebrew original, when there already was a widely available Greek translation to work from?
For example, in the passage where Jesus is reading from Isaiah in the synagogue (Luke 4:17-19), Luke quotes from the LXX. However, since Jesus was reading in a Galileean Jewish synagogue, the scroll would have been in Hebrew, not Greek.
DaveBj
F
Fidelis
Guest
The issue isn’t so much if he quoted in Greek form the Greek Septuagint translation, but whether he used the longer canon of the Septuagint that is essentially the same as the Catholic canon. This is in fact what he did, and there are a number of threads in this forum that show just that.
B
BayCityRickL
Guest
Jaroslav Pelikan is a Yale professor of history and his “Whose Bible is it?” was published this year. It is a “history of the scriptures throughout the ages.”
He spends a lot of time explaining and documenting the development of the Septuagint. It was a translation of the Hebrew scriptures into Greek for the benefit of Jews of the diaspora, who were detached from the use of Hebrew. It was a translation into the common language for the benefit of others who had some level of curiosity about the faith of the Jews.
He points out that the S. enabled the spread of Christianity, to the extent that it provided the basis for the understanding of C.
The translation of the scriptures into Greek also involved a considerable loss of content, which you might understand only by reading Pelikan’s worthwhile book. That’s another story inside of the main story.
And, as Pelikan points out, the use of Greek involves the complexity of studying the use of Greek as it was used to capture the Hebrew, and at the same time, incorporate or reflect existing ideas of Greek philosophy.
He also explains in authoritatiive detail, how Martin Luther rejected the Septuagint and created his own Bible from Hebrew sources. So, in effect, (my words now) Luther threw out the precedent of some 1400 years of Christianity. Of course, ostensibly overthrowing the “doctrines of men” meaning anything that originated in the Roman Church, he substituted his own doctrines, offered up as simply transparent reflections of the Bible.
It’s better that you read Pelikan on this for a scholarly history of Luther.
In the end, Pelikan offers up an answer to the title question of the book.
He spends a lot of time explaining and documenting the development of the Septuagint. It was a translation of the Hebrew scriptures into Greek for the benefit of Jews of the diaspora, who were detached from the use of Hebrew. It was a translation into the common language for the benefit of others who had some level of curiosity about the faith of the Jews.
He points out that the S. enabled the spread of Christianity, to the extent that it provided the basis for the understanding of C.
The translation of the scriptures into Greek also involved a considerable loss of content, which you might understand only by reading Pelikan’s worthwhile book. That’s another story inside of the main story.
And, as Pelikan points out, the use of Greek involves the complexity of studying the use of Greek as it was used to capture the Hebrew, and at the same time, incorporate or reflect existing ideas of Greek philosophy.
He also explains in authoritatiive detail, how Martin Luther rejected the Septuagint and created his own Bible from Hebrew sources. So, in effect, (my words now) Luther threw out the precedent of some 1400 years of Christianity. Of course, ostensibly overthrowing the “doctrines of men” meaning anything that originated in the Roman Church, he substituted his own doctrines, offered up as simply transparent reflections of the Bible.
It’s better that you read Pelikan on this for a scholarly history of Luther.
In the end, Pelikan offers up an answer to the title question of the book.
D
DianJo
Guest
Here is a link to the Deuterocanonical scripture quoted by Jesus and the Apostles.
http://www.cin.org/users/james/files/deutero3.htm
These scriptures were quoted many times in the NT.
http://www.cin.org/users/james/files/deutero3.htm
These scriptures were quoted many times in the NT.
B
BayCityRickL
Guest
To Protestant evangelicals, the citation or reference to certain books is not a guarantee of canonicity.
For there are references to other books or writings in scripture, not only are they not biblical in the sense we think of them, we don’t even have them anyplace, cf. Jude 1:14.
However, the citations regarding the Septuagint are very persuasive to me. They were cited precisely because they were considered scripture.
The link in the previous post is very interesting, but I’d also like to know that the NT cited non-deuterocanonical books as well. such a list would be quite long, I think.
For there are references to other books or writings in scripture, not only are they not biblical in the sense we think of them, we don’t even have them anyplace, cf. Jude 1:14.
However, the citations regarding the Septuagint are very persuasive to me. They were cited precisely because they were considered scripture.
The link in the previous post is very interesting, but I’d also like to know that the NT cited non-deuterocanonical books as well. such a list would be quite long, I think.
- Status