Yuku free message boards

lykaon wrote:

---

If find this a little confusing as LXX is the abbreviation for the Septuagint, which was written (translated from Hebrew) between 300 and 100 BC (no Chistians yet).

lykaon, welcome to the forum.

The original Septuagint (also called the LXX) was a translation of the Torah only (Five Books of Moses, Pentateuch) into Greek. The Prophets and Writings (Psalms fall into Writings) were not part of this translation. Over time persons unknown translated the Torah, Prophets and Writings into other languages. Those translated into Greek came to be called the Septuagint / LXX but no one knows who translated them or when. No one knows how well they knew Hebrew. Furthermore there was no set standard for the translations and over time they became more and more corrupt.

Ergo the LXX / Septuagint was not "translated between 300 - 100 BCE (no Chrstians yet) -- not what has been come to be called the Septuagint / LXX today at any rate. Emmanuel Tov wrote "The Greek and Hebrew Bible." Let's quote a bit from it:

"According to ancient evidence as well as modern descriptions, the translation of the Torah preceded that of the later books. . .there is no sound evidence for the liturgical use of the Greek Torah nor of the later Greek books" Page 183

As early as 100 CE (common era) Justin Martyr (100 CE to 165 CE) admitted that Greek translations were corrupt. From Martyr's "Dialogue with Trypho the Jew":

"They dare to assert that the interpretation produced by your seventy elders under Ptolemy of Egypt is in some points inaccurate."

So here is Martyr admitting the Greek is inaccurate -- and the ONLY translation done of the "70 elders" was the Torah, not prophets and not writings. The Greek translations were used by less educated Jews, primarily in the Diaspora. The original LXX was only of the Torah -- not the entire Tanach (Prophets and Writings). So no one even KNOWS who translated the prophets or writings into Greek -- let alone how good a job they did of it.

Even the Torah translation was:

1) A TRANSLATION. Translations are never a perfect mirror of the original so why anyone would reference them is a good question.

2) DISTORTED and CORRUPTED over time. We have no way of knowing what was distorted, by whom or when but the fact that it is unreliable was even noted as early as Justin Martyr who dates to about the same time frame as the anonymous author of "Matthew."


Even early Chrstians realized the Greek translations were inaccurate. Origen, an early church father (died 232 CE) tried to piece together a decent translation by putting 6 different versions side by side (called the Hexapla). Here is what HE says about how bad the Septuagint had become

Quote:

---

we are forthwith to reject as spurious the copies in use in our Churches, and enjoin the brotherhood to put away the sacred books current among them, and to coax the Jews, and persuade them to give us copies which shall be untampered with, and free from forgery! Origen, A Letter from Origen to Africanus, Ante-Nicene Fathers, Volume 4.]

---

The point of quoting Origen is to show that whoever the original translators were of the rest of the bible the various Greek versions became very corrupt over time. The Xians themselves realized this -- as Origen states.

Even the translators of the King James version knew the Septuagint aka LXX was corrupt. This is from the preface to the original KJV:

Quote:

---

(The Septuagint) "It is certain, that that Translation was not so sound and so perfect, but it needed in many places correction; and who had been so sufficient for this work as the Apostles or Apostolic men? . . .

. . . the Translation of the Seventy was allowed to pass for current. Notwithstanding, though it was commended generally, yet it did not fully content the learned, no not of the Jews.

For not long after Chr*st, Aquila fell in hand with a new Translation, and after him Theodotion, and after him Symmachus; yea, there was a fifth and a sixth edition, the Authors whereof were not known

Hope that helps explain UriYosef's comment in his article.