Masoretic vs Septuagint

  • Thread starter Thread starter GRod
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
G

GRod

Guest
Hey yall. Ive heard that the KJV uses the masoretic text for their old testament. And obviuously the Catholics use the Septuagint. Is this true and if so is it true that the masoretic text has different wording in the old testament? Do Catholics use the masoretic text too or just the Septuagint?..also if the 3 and 4 macabees was good enough for the early christians…why did catholics remove these from the Septuagint…i know we say its because it was not inspired… But if it was in the Septuagint wasnt it expired?
 
Who says 3 and 4 Maccabees were in the Septuagint? Do you have a source?
 
Most modern Catholic translations actually use either the LXX or the Mesoretic texts as a base while cross referencing the Dead Sea Scrolls to try determining the original forms. Obviously some books only exist in one tradition so it would use the base.

It’s also important to remember that all our LXX derived copies don’t have the same books. For instance, Codex Vaticanus does not include 1-4 Maccabees where as Codex Alexandrinus does (along with psalm 151). That is part of the reason they go back to the Qumran Scrolls to see what scriptures existed in the 1st century and what form they took.

As to the question if the two sources differ? Yes. I have seen articles that claim that the Masoretic texts use sources that downplay or alter certain prophecies that point toward Christ, but how valid those claims are I cannot say. Since I don’t read Greek or Hebrew I don’t know how much difference there is between the two traditions.
 
Wow thank you that. I have heard that the macebees were not found in the dead sea scrolls. Is this true? I eonder which version of the Septuagint the early church used?
 
GRod said:
Wow thank you that. I have heard that the macebees were not found in the dead sea scrolls. Is this true? I eonder which version of the Septuagint the early church used?
Click to expand...
That is true as far as I know, but it is also not surprising. The kumran sect were isolationist and has an extreme disliked of the Hasmonean dynasty; the very dynasty founded by the Maccabees.

I suspect different Churches used different versions and hence the reason the orthodox include 1 Esdra and 3-4 Maccabees and Origen studied 6 (later 8) translations in the Hexapla.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top