I also have a copy of Dr. Kirk D. DiVietro's,
Did Jesus and the Apostles Quote from the Septuagint (LXX)?, where he compares readings, both from the Hebrew and the Greek, and I could scan a few pages from that.
This is from pages 4 and 7 (before he compares the actual quotes in Greek and Hebrew) :
The Aramaic Talmuds which contained acceptable Aramaic paraphrases of the Hebrew text were considered authoritative commentaries, but not the word of God. The Palestinian Jewish community accepted only the Hebrew Scriptures. This was the community of Jesus and the Apostles.
The prophets and the Hagiographa (Holy Writings), the other two divisions of the Hebrew Scriptures, were the object of various official and unofficial translation attempts. By the days of Philo (100 B.C.) and Josephus (100 A.D.), there was an almost complete Alexandrian version of the Old Testament. While this Greek Old Testament did circulate in the Hellenistic world, it did not enjoy the full confidence of its readers except in the synagogues of Egypt....
Other regions of the Hellenistic world combined the Alexandrian Pentateuch with a regional Greek text of the Prophets and Holy Writings. There were regional Greek Bibles which enjoyed varying confidence by their readers.
In Alexandria, the confidence was almost unshakable. In Israel, the Hebrew Scriptures continued to dominate in the Synagogue. There were forms of the Greek Old Testament available to Jesus and the writers of the New Testament Scripture. Usually the Alexandrian translation of the Law of Moses combined with a regionally done copy of the Holy Writings and the Prophets, is called the Septuagint in a non-technical sense. BUT, there is no reliable evidence that the Septuagint as it is known and published today, did* exist in the pre-Christ world.
In this paper, I will attempt to clarify my use of the term in its setting. We are asking the question, “Did Jesus and the writers of the New Testament use a complete, universally accepted Greek Old Testament, produced in Alexandria, Egypt, as the authoritative Word of God.”
-------------
....If Jesus and the writers of Scripture accepted [the LXX] as authoritative Scripture then the plenary, verbal inspiration of Scripture is irrelevant. If Jesus and the writers of Scripture accepted it as authoritative Scripture then the doctrine of preservation is a sham.
The Value of the Septuagint to Us
What value does the LXX have for us? Just because the LXX is not the Bible of Jesus and the writers of Scripture does not mean that it is valueless. The Septuagint married the vocabulary of Greece to the theology of Israel. If this marriage had not taken place Christianity would have either died as an extension of Israel’s law, or Greece’s logic. But in the Septuagint, God provided a commentary and word study….
The work of the early Greek translators of the Old Testament provided a ready made translational database for Jesus and the writers of Scripture. While on occasion they may have coined a phrase or borrowed vocabulary, the writers of the New Testament had established Greek equivalents to work with. The similarities between fragmentary Greek Old Testament manuscripts and the New Testament may well have been the joyful result of not having to reinvent the wheel. While they may not have used the pseudo-Septuagints for their daily Bible, they may well have used them to shortcut the process of restating a Hebrew quote in the Greek New Testament. When the pseudo-Septuagint fell short in accuracy, the writer would offer a Holy Ghost inspired running translation.
The pseudo-Septuagint offers the modern Bible student a rich source of semi-Biblical, theological literature. Having this large homogenous yet diverse body of literature, the student can determine with relative accuracy the meaning of words he finds in the Greek New Testament. The search facilities of modern computers allows the student to do original statistical analysis and reach first hand decisions on matters of definition and use. The student is no longer servant to the scholars.
[End of DiVietro]
