There has been a misguided preference by Protestants and even some Church Fathers for the Hebrew standardized text and canon. The reason why its misguided is because they have wrongly assumed that the Masoretic Text is the original Hebrew, but instead it is more of a Pharisee revision of revisions of a more ancient Hebrew and Aramaic version. The Septuagint version had been considered to have many errors until the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls, which showed that the Septuagint was a translation of a better and more ancient Hebrew text. As awesome as St. Jerome was he was misguided by this, in turn he favored the Hebrew text of his day more than he probably should have, which was inferior to the Septuagint. Jerome did not have the whole picture due to the better Hebrew manuscripts were not available to him, what a shame he could not have had access to the Dead Sea Scrolls then. Jerome’s favor of the Hebrew text of his day had some effect on his hesitation of some of the Deuterocanonicals.Why did the protestant reformers revert back to the Hebrew Cannon vs the Greek Cannon for the OT?
In doing so wouldn’t the protestant reformers be preferring a Jewish Cannon of the Old Testament over the Christian Cannon of the Old Testament?
Please note that the Septuagint text or the Greek text was a cannon of scripture in which the Early Church Fathers put together over the years… This was the Christian Cannon of the OTThe Septuagint version had been considered to have many errors until the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls, which showed that the Septuagint was a translation of a better and more ancient Hebrew text…
The Septuagint was put together by Greek-speaking Jews before the time of Christ. It is the version of Jewish Scriptures known to Christ. The Masoretic text as such – the “Palestinian Canon” – was unknown to Christ.Please note that the Septuagint text or the Greek text was a cannon of scripture in which the Early Church Fathers put together over the years… This was the Christian Cannon of the OT
The Hebrew Text which the protestant reformers reverted too - was the cannon of the Jews which came about because of the new Christians - although the Jews would agree on what was and was not scripture in most cases - the cannon was not there in the form it is today.
I agree with Peter - i’ve read that most biblical scholars (including Protestant liguistic scholars) acknowledge that the substantial majority of quotes to the Old Testatement found the NT are to the Septuagent translation, rather than the Palestinian cannon - suggesting, as Peter said, that Jesus and the apostles were reading and studying the Septuagent Greek translation.The Septuagint was put together by Greek-speaking Jews before the time of Christ. It is the version of Jewish Scriptures known to Christ. The Masoretic text as such – the “Palestinian Canon” – was unknown to Christ.
Careful review of the Gospels makes it clear that Christ had two of the Deuterocanonicals in the Septuagint, the Books of Wisdom and Sirach – practically committed to memory.
This is incorrect. The Septuigent predated Christ by about 200 years. Here is an article with more detaile info.Please note that the Septuagint text or the Greek text was a cannon of scripture in which the Early Church Fathers put together over the years… This was the Christian Cannon of the OT
As far as Canon, I believe the answer can be rather easily found in the resources Martin Luther used, as taken from the bible researcher’s site, he used the following as the basis of his translation:Why did the protestant reformers revert back to the Hebrew Cannon vs the Greek Cannon for the OT?
In doing so wouldn’t the protestant reformers be preferring a Jewish Cannon of the Old Testament over the Christian Cannon of the Old Testament?
Now what you find is that Luther didn’t innovate, he followed these resources. His translation was in agreement with the judgements given in the Vulgate, the Glossa ordinaria, and the other two Latin translations. The other resources did not specifically give an opinion as to the canon.The basis for Luther’s version of the Old Testament was the Massoretic text as published by Gerson Ben Mosheh at Brescia in 1494. (24) He used also the Septuagint, the Vulgate of Jerome (25) (although he disliked him exceedingly on account of his monkery), the Latin translations of the Dominican Sanctes Pagnini of Lucca (1527), and of the Franciscan Sebastian Münster (1534), the “Glossa ordinaria” (a favorite exegetical vade-mecum of Walafried Strabo from the ninth century), and Nicolaus Lyra (d. 1340), the chief of mediaeval commentators, who, besides the Fathers, consulted also the Jewish rabbis. (26)
Brian, are you the same Brian from “Bible Study for Catholics”?I agree with Peter - i’ve read that most biblical scholars (including Protestant liguistic scholars) acknowledge that the substantial majority of quotes to the Old Testatement found the NT are to the Septuagent translation, rather than the Palestinian cannon - suggesting, as Peter said, that Jesus and the apostles were reading and studying the Septuagent Greek translation.
BTW, the book of Maccaabees (in the books omitted from the jewish cannon in the second century and by the Protestants in the reformation) is the only place in scriputre where the jewish holiday of Hanukkah (feastival of lights) is recorded - yet we know from the NT that Jesus celebrated it.
Blessings,
Brian
Hi Peter - I don’t believe so, unless you are referring to a thread here I don’t recall.Brian, are you the same Brian from “Bible Study for Catholics”?