I personally think some of the comments on this site can get pretty ridiculous at times, more importantly, they can utterly obliterate an otherwise important message. However, you know what is said about opinions and how they are like a particular body part (everybody’s got one, and they all stink). The thing I have seen that truly ruins credibility is when atheists/agnostics/whatever pontificate about the Bible, yet they don’t believe in it in the first place.
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (193)
sorted by:
You can't compare the texts of the LXX with the KJV. LXX was the OT translated from Hebrew into Greek at the last time when people who knew the OT were fluent in both. It was completed circa 250 BC.
The OT in KJV was translated from the Masoretic text which wasn't completed until 900 AD, or maybe 950. Jews changed it to obfuscate that Jesus is the Christ. The Church ALWAYS used the LXX until Martin Luther. Jesus read the LXX, as did His disciples.
You can compare a translation into English of the LXX to the KJV, but let's not confuse people.
Excellent input, fren.
Yes sorry I wasn't more clear. Meant translation comparison
👍
Septuagint / LXX is something that gets thrown around so much, and many readers don't actually know what's being discussed. Familiarity, contempt, and all that.
Yes, there are some places where LXX is surprisingly different from KJV, and more than just quirks of old English.
I have a Lexham Septuagint along with my KJV study Bible, and a JPS Tanakh which is Masoretic, and numerous other helps, it is fascinating indeed to study the differences.
The things done by the Masoretic translation to muddle the proof of Christ are incredibly obvious when you compare Masoretic and Septuagint, and I find Septuagint most convincing bc it PREDATES Jesus yet describes him so accurately!