|
Post by rgrove on Jan 5, 2005 13:09:11 GMT -5
I have read in the past that the Orthodox consider the Septuagint to be inspired. When I began working in Greek I purchased the LXX and it's obvious how much the NT writers used it. Whenever I am doing serious study on a passage that is quoted from the OT I like to look at the NT Greek as well as the OT Greek of the LXX. Even if I don't know the words I can read it well enough to compare whether it's word for word from the LXX and it frequently is. So the relationship between the LXX and the NT is very interesting. But that comment was from a Protestant author. I was just curious if PaxJohn could explain Orthodox views of the LXX.
|
|
|
Post by Mysterion on Apr 3, 2005 12:14:47 GMT -5
The Orthodox take a very practical view of the LXX. This was the Bible of the Savior, and his Disciples. The LXX was the Bible of the early Church Fathers. The sticky point is The Council of Jamnia (c. 90AD). At this council, Jewish rabbinic authorities set forth the Jewish canon that we see today. Protestants use this Jewish reckoning for their OT. The Orthodox question whether the the Jewish people had the right to this, as the Church was now the "ecclesia", or, people of God. The Orthodox believe that the Bible that the Lord would have used, and the bible that was used to spread the faith, the LXX, is the inspired Hebrew Scriptures. That does not mean however, that we don't don't use the Hebrew text, it just means that the Septuagint is preferred. I hope this wasn't too confusing!
|
|
|
Post by melinky on Apr 3, 2005 19:55:20 GMT -5
I'm interested in what you are saying, but I'm not sure I'm following. Could you explain the differences between, or define, LXX and Septuagint. I think I mainly don't understand what the LXX is.
Thanks,
Melinda
|
|
|
Post by Mysterion on Apr 3, 2005 20:28:31 GMT -5
Sorry Melinda, my poor writing ability confused you. The LXX (70 in Roman Numerals), and the Septuagint are the same body of Scriptures. I will give a very brief history lesson copied and pasted from orthodoxwiki (I'm lazy): The translation of the Septuagint undertaken in Alexandria at the behest of the Egyptian King, Ptolemy, who wished to expand the celebrated library of Alexandria to include the wisdom of all the ancient religions of the world. Because Greek was the language of Alexandria, the Scriptures therefore had to be translated into that language. The Letter of Aristeas, the oldest known source we have for the origin of the Septuagint, details how Ptolemy contacted the chief priest, Eleazar, in Jerusalem and asked him to send translators. Six were chosen from each of the twelve tribes of Israel, giving us the commonly accepted number of seventy-two. (Other accounts have the number at seventy or seventy-five.) Only the Torah (the first five books) was translated initially, but eventually other translations (and even compositions) were added to the collection. By the time of our Lord, the Septuagint was the Bible in use by most Hellenistic Jews. Thus, when the Apostles quote the Jewish Scripture in their own writings, the overwhelmingly dominant source for their wording comes directly from the Septuagint (LXX). Given that the spread of the Gospel was most successful among the Gentiles and Hellenistic Jews, it made sense that the LXX would be the Bible for the early Church. Following in the footsteps of those first generations of Christians, the Orthodox Church continues to regard the LXX as its only canonical text of the Old Testament. There are a number of differences between the canon of the LXX and that of Roman Catholic Church and Protestant Christians, based on differences in translation tradition or doctrine. There ya go!
|
|
|
Post by melinky on Apr 4, 2005 7:40:47 GMT -5
Thanks Mysterion! Now, how drastic are the differences between most Protestant Bibles and the LXX? Are these dramatic differences or just different ways of saying the same thing?
Melinda
|
|
|
Post by Mysterion on Apr 4, 2005 9:07:11 GMT -5
Well, translation-wise they are pretty close. The Hebrew text has variations that do not agree with the Christian understanding of the text, in most everycase any Bible printed in the last 20 years will put the Septugint alternate in a foot-note. That is because Protestant Bibles use the Hebrew text, but will fall back on the Septuagint in matters of controversy. Good luck finding an Orthodox english translation of the Septuagint, so far nothing, but there is work being done. Most Orthodox Christians are content using Protestant Bibles. I like the New Oxford Revised Standard Version of the Bible. It is ecumenical in production and contains the full canon of the Septuagint (all the books left out by R. Catholics & Protestants).
|
|