# Jesus and the Septuagint



## BibleCyst (Jun 20, 2011)

You know what's funny? When I started typing this thread, I was under the assumption that Jesus frequently quoted from the Septuagint. After a really quick Google, I see some take issue with this. Did Jesus quote from the Septuagint?

The question above was not the question I originally intended this thread for. Here's my more specific question. Did Jesus ever quote a passage of the Septuagint (recorded in the New Testament, obviously) that by modern day standards of textual criticism, would be omitted from the text? I realize that unlike the NT, the OT text is incredibly consistent; and combined with the fact that Jesus never quoted paragraphs and paragraphs, this question might be impossible to answer. I'm just curious.


----------



## elnwood (Jun 23, 2011)

There are some quotations of Jesus that are more consonantal with the Septuagint than the Masoretic text (Isaiah 29:13, for example), but none that I know of that is completely omitted in the Masoretic text, or some other major manuscript tradition.

Textual criticism of the Old Testament is not as well defined as New Testament textual criticism. Because the NT manuscripts were less consistent and more widely propagated, it is easier to trace where the mistakes are and recover the original text. Hence, the NA/UBS text is generally accepted as reliable by scholars even when they differ on individual textual decisions.

On the other hand, there is no comparable critical text of the Old Testament because there is far less consensus. There seems to be general agreement, though, that the Masoretic text and the Hebrew text that underlies the Septuagint are about equally reliable, depending on the particular book.


----------



## MW (Jun 23, 2011)

Septuaginta = 70; hence LXX. We do not believe that Jesus quoted from a translation of the Old Testament which was made according to the details of the fabulous story of 72 translators arriving at the same inspired translation. 

Once the literal referent of the "septuagint" is rejected we are left with the more mundane "Greek translation." If a "Greek translation" is the point of reference, what form does it take -- oral or written? To what extent was this translation completed and/or accepted at the time of Jesus? Is it even safe to assume that such a Greek translation would have been in use in Palestine at the time of Jesus? Then there is the perplexing question as to whether Jesus Himself would have used such a translation. Following on from this is the question of accommodation, To what extent did Jesus simply make use of what was available in order to get His message across?

As might be deduced from this line of questioning, there are a number of factors which influence one's understanding of the facts.


----------



## Pergamum (Jun 29, 2011)

Are you saying that there is no such thing as the LXX?


----------



## MW (Jun 29, 2011)

Pergamum said:


> Are you saying that there is no such thing as the LXX?



I have two volumes on my shelf called Septuaginta, and Septuaginta translates to LXX in Roman numerals, so there must be such a thing as the LXX.


----------

