The study of how God has preserved the Scriptures begins with examining the preservation of the Old Testament. As we have already seen, the Lord Jesus Christ taught the doctrine of preservation during His earthly ministry. Jesus said in Matthew 5:18, "For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled." Even though heaven and earth might pass away, the Scriptures would never pass away. Jesus taught that the Old Testament had been preserved from the time of its writing to the present, and that it would never be lost.
Those who believe this promise, almost unanimously, agree that the Hebrew Masoretic text is the preserved ancient text of the Old Testament Scriptures. This text was also used as the textual basis for the translation of the Old Testament of the King James Version, as well as many other translations in many languages throughout church history. Let us examine the history of the Hebrew Masoretic text and how it was preserved from the time of its writing until today.
The task of preserving the Scriptures was given in the Old Testament to the priests. Deuteronomy 17:18 states, "And it shall be, when he sitteth upon the throne of his kingdom, that he shall write him a copy of this law in a book out of that which is before the priests the Levites:" The book of Romans also makes clear that the Jews were entrusted with the care of the Old Testament Scriptures. Romans 3:2 states, "Much every way: chiefly, because that unto them were committed the oracles of God." As we will see, history bears witness how the Jewish priests went to great efforts to care for and make faithful copies of the Scriptures.
During the time of the Babylonian captivity, the pure Hebrew text of Scripture was preserved and available to Ezra the priest. Ezra 7:10 reads, "For Ezra had prepared his heart to seek the law of the Lord, and to do it, and to teach in Israel statutes and judgments." From the time of Ezra until the time of Christ, the Scriptures continued to be propagated and preserved by the Jews.
After the time of Christ, various groups of scribes continued to faithfully copy the Scriptures. The earliest of these scribes were called Tannaim (teachers) and were known for their tremendously accurate copies. The Tannaim were followed later by another group, known as the Amoraim (Expositors) who also aided in the copying of the Old Testament.[1]
The Hebrew Masoretic Text
As we have already mentioned, the preserved text of the Hebrew Old Testament is called the Hebrew Masoretic Text. This text received its name from the Masoretic scribes. The Masorites were Jewish scholars who were concerned with the precise transmission of the Scriptures. They were active from 600–950 AD and followed strict and elaborate scribal traditions in order to guarantee the precise copying of the Hebrew text of the Old Testament.[2]
The Masorites followed the traditions of ancient Jewish scribes that included many complicated systems and methods in order to ensure the precise and accurate copying of the Scriptures. For example, the number of words and even the middle letter of a book, were counted and recorded in each copy to help verify that no errors had been made. The scribes would even note and compare how many times a word or phrase appeared in a book.[3] God used these scribes to help fulfill His promise of preserving His Word in the Old Testament through their faithful transmission of the Hebrew text.
Rabbi Akiba (died around 135 AD) shows the attitude of the Jewish scribes when he said, "the accurate transmission is a fence for the Torah."[4] The historical evidence supports the belief that the Old Testament text has indeed been preserved. The number of Hebrew Old Testament manuscripts is around 2,000, although some are only portions of the Old Testament.[5]
The accuracy in which the scribes preserved the text of the Old Testament is seen in a discovery made by Dr. Yigael Yadin in Israel. Portions of the Old Testament texts were discovered that could not be older than 73 AD. The discovery included chapters eight to twelve of the book of Leviticus. What is so incredible, is that the text was absolutely identical with the Hebrew Masoretic text. Dr. Yadin also discovered other ancient manuscripts of other parts of the Old Testament that were in agreement with the traditional Hebrew Masoretic text.[6]
The Hebrew Masoretic text has historically been considered God's preserved Word. The complete Old Testament text was printed for the first time in 1488, after the invention of the printing press. Many famous translators such as Martin Luther, and the AV1611 translation committee, used this text in their Bible translations.[7]
Although the Hebrew Masoretic text has been the trusted text of the Old Testament for many centuries, modern textual criticism has recently doubted it. In many cases, they have rejected the Hebrew Masoretic text as being supposedly inferior to translations of the Old Testament. Most of the modern Bible translations no longer faithfully follow the Hebrew Masoretic, but rather a Greek translation of the Old Testament Hebrew called the Septuagint.
The Greek Septuagint or LXX
The Septuagint is a corrupt translation of the Old Testament from Hebrew into Greek. Its exact origins are unknown. There is a strange, and obviously mythical, legend about its origins that comes from the Letter of Aristeas. The legend says that a group of 72 scribes assembled in 285-247 BC to translate the Pentateuch into Greek. The name LXX (Roman numerals for 70) refers to these 72 scribes.[8] According to the legend, these scribes supposedly made the translation in 72 days and each individual scribe translated the Hebrew into Greek in exactly the same way. The myth states that the translation was inspired in the same manner as the original Hebrew autographs. Quoting The Lexham Bible Dictionary, "Philo indicates that the translators miraculously produced exactly the same result."[9]
The details of this legend are obviously exaggerated and untrue. The Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Churchnotes the legend's discrepancies: "Internal evidence indicates that the LXX was really the work of a number of translators (in some cases more than one scholar sharing the responsibility for a single Book), that not all of it was translated at Alexandria, and that the work of translation extended over a considerable period."[10]
Many modern textual critics often prefer the Septuagint's reading to that of the Hebrew Masoretic, but is this Greek translation really superior to the Hebrew? When we examine the evidence, we will quickly see that the LXX (Septuagint) has many problems and is not as reliable as is claimed.
The quality of the LXX as a translation is very problematic. Dr. Moorman comments on this fact: "At its most idiomatic, it abounds with Hebraisms; at its worst it is little more than Hebrew in disguise. But with these reservations the Pentateuch can be classified as fairly idiomatic and consistent, though there are traces of its being the work of more than one translator. Outside the Pentateuch, some books, it seems, were divided between two translators working simultaneously, while others were translated piecemeal at different times by different men using widely different methods and vocabulary. Consequently, the style varies from fairly good Koine Greek, as in part of Joshua, to indifferent Greek, as in Chronicles, Psalms, the Minor Prophets, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and parts of Kings, to lateral and sometimes unintelligible translation as in Judges, Ruth, Song of Solomon, Lamentations, and other parts of Kings ... Comparatively few books attain to the standard of the Pentateuch; most are of medium quality, some are very poor. Isaiah as a translation is bad; Esther, Job, Proverbs are free paraphrases ... Proverbs contains things not in the Hebrew text at all, and Hebrew sentiments are freely altered to suit the Greek outlook."[11] It should also be noted that the LXX version of Job is 17 percent shorter than that of the Hebrew, and Jeremiah is 12 percent shorter.[12]
The LXX is not only a problematic translation of the Hebrew, it also has obvious errors in it. For example, Genesis 5:26 in the Hebrew Masoretic states that Methuselah lived 782 years, but the LXX says that he lived 802 years.[13] The LXX has Methuselah living 20 years longer than the Hebrew Masoretic. This is a problem, especially because according to the Hebrew, Methuselah died the same year as the flood. If the LXX is correct, then Methuselah survived the flood by 14 years which contradicts the Biblical narrative that only 8 survived the flood (1 Peter 3:20). The Hebrew is obviously correct and the Greek LXX is in error.
There are many other examples of errors in the LXX. Genesis 2:15 has "garden of Delight" instead of "garden of Eden." Genesis 3:8 says "afternoon" instead of "cool of the day." Genesis 5:3 says Adam was 230 years old when Seth was born instead of 130 years as in the Hebrew. Genesis 5:6 has 205 years when it should read 105 years. Genesis 5:7 says 707 years instead of the Hebrew 807 years. Genesis 5:9 says 190 years instead of 90 years in the Hebrew. Many other examples of errors in lifespans are found in Genesis chapters 5 and 11 of the LXX. Genesis 6:14-15 in the LXX has the ark being built out of square wood instead of gopher wood. Genesis 10:2 adds a son named Elisa to the list of Japheth's children (there are also many other examples of names added). Genesis 10:10 calls Babel "Babylon." Genesis 20:14 adds a thousand pieces of silver. The list of differences and contradictions between the Hebrew Masoretic and the LXX is long and extensive.
The LXX not only changes many of the Hebrew readings, it also deletes entire portions of Scripture. Exodus 36:10-33 is completely missing in the LXX. Other passages that have been entirely removed include Jeremiah 52:28-30, 1 Samuel 18:1-3, Exodus 28:23-28, Proverbs 22:6, Isaiah 2:22, and others.
The LXX is also tremendously different from the traditional Hebrew Bible because it contains the apocryphal books mixed within the normal canon. This is strange as the Apocrypha has historically been rejected by the Jews.[14]The traditional divisions of the Law, Prophets and Writings are also abandoned in the LXX.
The apocryphal books were rejected by the Jews, in part, because they contain heretical doctrines that contradict the rest of the Bible. For example, Tobit 6:5–9 contains obvious occult practices, it reads: "Then the angel said to him, “Cut open the fish and take out its gall, heart, and liver. Keep them with you, but throw away the intestines. For its gall, heart, and liver are useful as medicine.” 6 So after cutting open the fish the young man gathered together the gall, heart, and liver; then he roasted and ate some of the fish, and kept some to be salted. The two continued on their way together until they were near Media. 7 Then the young man questioned the angel and said to him, “Brother Azariah, what medicinal value is there in the fish’s heart and liver, and in the gall?” 8 He replied, “As for the fish’s heart and liver, you must burn them to make a smoke in the presence of a man or woman afflicted by a demon or evil spirit, and every affliction will flee away and never remain with that person any longer. 9 And as for the gall, anoint a person’s eyes where white films have appeared on them; blow upon them, upon the white films, and the eyes will be healed.” [15]
This narrative directly contradicts the prohibition of witchcraft found in Deuteronomy 18:10–12. There are other examples of contradictions with the Scriptures such as salvation by giving alms (Tobit 12:9) and offering sacrifices for the salvation of the dead (2 Maccabees 12:43-45).
The LXX's inclusion of the Apocryphal books could in part explain why modern textual critics prefer the LXX over the Hebrew. This is foolish when we consider that Jesus himself rejected these books as canon when He classified the Old Testament in Matthew 23:35. It states, "...from the blood of righteous Abel unto the blood of Zacharias son of Barachias, whom ye slew between the temple and the altar." 2 Chronicles was the last book in the Hebrew Bible. The LXX ends with Daniel and then Bel and the Dragon. This statement clearly shows that Jesus rejected the continued stories of the Apocrypha as canon.
Modern textual critics often elevate the LXX over the original Hebrew manuscripts by claiming that it was the Bible of Jesus and the Apostles. However, this is very unlikely. Jesus spoke of the Old Testament Scriptures as written in Hebrew. He specifically noted the Hebrew Bible divisions, for example, Luke 24:44 states, "And he said unto them, These are the words which I spake unto you, while I was yet with you, that all things must be fulfilled, which were written in the law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the psalms, concerning me."
The probability that Jesus preferred a Greek translation to the Hebrew text is very low. Hebrew was the language of the synagogue during the time of Christ, as it is today. The scrolls that Jesus read from were almost certainly in Hebrew.[16]
Despite popular claims, there is little evidence that the modern Septuagint existed during the time of Christ. It is a possibility, but it is by no means certain. The Letter of Aristeas is obviously legendary and does not present firm proof that what we call the Septuagint (LXX) today existed at the time of Christ. Manuscript evidence of the Septuagint has not produced a copy dating prior to 200 AD (some say 300 AD).[17] Many believe that the modern Septuagint was assembled by Origen in Alexandria, Egypt.
Of the supposed evidence given for the translation of the Septuagint before the time of Christ is the existence of four fragments containing verses from the book of Deuteronomy. These manuscript fragments date from a period before Christ and are the only Greek manuscripts from any part of the Old Testament ever found that predate the time of Jesus.
The first three manuscript fragments known as "Rylands Papyri 458" were found together, and contain Deuteronomy 23; 25:1-3; 26:12, 17, 19 and 28:31-33. A fourth fragment was found in the city of Fouad, Egypt, and repeats the same verses, but also adds Deuteronomy 32:7.
None of the New Testament writers ever cite any of these passages and therefore it cannot be proven which Bible Christ and the apostles used. These are the only Greek Old Testament manuscripts that predate the time of Christ. The only thing they prove is that someone had translated part of the book of Deuteronomy into Greek before 150 BC. Given the fact that these passages were not cited by anyone, it becomes impossible to verify who used this translation and how popular it was.
The claim that Jesus and the apostles quoted from the Septuagint is also suspect. Quoting Dr. Moorman: "There are about 263 direct quotations from the Old Testament in the New, and of these only 88 correspond closely to the Septuagint. A further 64 are used with some variations, 37 have the same meaning expressed in different words, 16 agree more closely with the Hebrew, and 20 differ both from the Hebrew and the Septuagint."[18]
The fact that the LXX sometimes corresponds with the New Testament quotes is not firm evidence that Jesus and the apostles were quoting from the LXX. It could very easily have been the other way around. A likely possibility is that the 88 quotations that correspond closely with the Septuagint do so because it was produced after the time of the apostles, and quotes the New Testament. It also should be noted that when Jesus and the apostles referred to the Old Testament Scriptures, it was often in reference to a fulfilled prophecy and not a direct quote.
The LXX varies from the Hebrew Masoretic text in many ways. Additions, omissions, and changes were expressly prohibited in the Old Testament Law. Deuteronomy 4:2 states, "Ye shall not add unto the word which I command you, neither shall ye diminish ought from it, that ye may keep the commandments of the Lord your God which I command you."Proverbs 30:6 confirms this, "Add thou not unto his words, Lest he reprove thee, and thou be found a liar."
The person who honestly examines the evidence should conclude that the LXX is not where God has preserved the text of the Old Testament. Those that prefer to use the LXX in modern Bible versions do not believe it is perfect either. The reality is that most modern Bible translators do not believe that any text is perfect. They make God into a liar by saying that He has not perfectly preserved His Word. The truth is that God did perfectly preserve His Word and He used the Hebrew Masoretic text to help do so.
The Septuagint (LXX) in modern translations
If someone wants a Bible in any language that is faithful to what God originally wrote, they need a translation that follows the Hebrew Masoretic text and not the LXX. Unfortunately, this is not true of most modern translations in most languages. Almost all modern translations follow, at least in part, the LXX. The result is that these translations contain erroneous readings, omissions, additions, and changes to the Word of God.
It should be noted that the translations that use the LXX do not follow it faithfully. These translations normally mix the LXX and the Hebrew Masoretic. The reason for this is that if they followed the LXX faithfully, they would have obvious errors and large portions of missing verses such as Exodus 36:10-33, Jeremiah 52:28-30, 1 Samuel 18:1-3, and Proverbs 22:6. It is very likely that they would sell far fewer Bibles if they were consistently faithful to the LXX.
Instead of faithfully following either text, many modern translations mix multiple texts according to how the translators see fit. The result is a Bible that is really a hybrid of multiple texts, a hybrid that has not previously existed prior to the translators creating it. These new hybrid Bibles are nothing more than creations based on the preferences of modern "scholars."
Almost all modern translations are different in regards to which texts are used and when. Some use the LXX in one verse and a different version uses it in another. Who decides when to use what text? The reality is that it is completely up to the preferences of the translation committees. It is for this reason that modern Bible translations can be so different from one another.
In the following examples, we will examine a few popular Spanish and English Bible translations and how they have, or have not, inserted the LXX into their Old Testament text. We will use three English and three Spanish Bibles for our comparisons, the King James Version (KJV), the Brenton LXX (an English translation of the LXX), The New International Version (NIV), the Reina-Valera Gomez (RVG), the Reina-Valera 1909 (RV1909), and the Reina-Valera 1960 (RV1960). English explanations will be added to help the reader with the Spanish versions.
Who wept, Hagar or the child? - Genesis 21:16b
(KJV) ... And she sat over against him, and lift up her voice, and wept. (Hagar wept)
(Brenton LXX) ... and she sat opposite him, and the child cried aloud and wept. (The child wept)
(NIV) ... And as she sat there, she began to sob. (Hagar wept)
(RVG) ... y se sentó enfrente, y alzó su voz y lloró.
(Hagar wept)
(RV1909) ... y sentóse enfrente, y alzó su voz y lloró.
(Hagar wept)
(RV1960) ... cuando ella se sentó enfrente, el muchacho alzó su voz y lloró. (the child wept)
In this example the LXX adds "the child" to the verse and changes who it was that wept. The KJV, RVG, RV1909, and the NIV follow the Hebrew. The RV1960 follows the Septuagint (Brenton LXX). Both readings cannot be correct. One is right and one wrong. Since we know that the LXX contains errors, the Hebrew should be considered correct.
Did or did not increase the joy? - Isaiah 9:3a
(KJV) Thou hast multiplied the nation, and not increased the joy: (Hebrew)
(Brenton LXX) The multitude of the people which thou hast brought down in thy joy, (LXX)
(NIV)You have enlarged the nation and increased their joy; (LXX)
(RVG) Aumentando la gente, no aumentaste la alegría. (Hebrew)
(RV1909) Aumentando la gente, no aumentaste la alegría. (Hebrew)
(RV1960) Multiplicaste la gente, y aumentaste la alegría. (LXX)
In Isaiah 9:3 we see another big difference between the Hebrew Masoretic and the LXX. The Hebrew says that God did not increase the joy and the LXX says that He did. The Bible translations shown here are not just making translation preferences, they are following two different texts. What is being said is two different things that are opposite from one another. If we follow the Hebrew, we know that God did not increase the joy. If we follow the LXX, which has demonstratable errors, we will think that He did. The KJV, RVG, and RV1909 correctly follow the Hebrew and the RV1960 and NIV follow the LXX.
Added phrase in the LXX - Genesis 4:8a
(KJV) And Cain talked with Abel his brother: ... (Hebrew)
(Brenton LXX) And Cain said to Abel his brother, Let us go out into the plain;... (LXX)
(NIV) Now Cain said to his brother Abel, “Let’s go out to the field.”... (LXX)
(RVG) Y habló Caín con su hermano Abel. ... (Hebrew)
(RV1909) Y habló Caín a su hermano Abel: ... (Hebrew)
(RV1960) Y dijo Caín a su hermano Abel: Salgamos al campo. (LXX)
In Genesis 4:8 we have an example of an addition made in the LXX that is not in the original Hebrew. The phrase "Let us go into the plain" is only found in the corrupt Septuagint. The NIV and RV1960 once again follow the LXX and the KJV, RVG, and RV1909 do not.
I know him removed - Genesis 18:19a
(KJV) For I know him, that he will command his children and his household after him, (Hebrew)
(Brenton LXX) For I know that he will order his sons, and his house after him, (LXX)
(NIV) For I have chosen him, so that he will direct his children and his household after him (LXX)
(RVG) Porque yo lo conozco, sé que mandará a sus hijos y a su casa después de sí, (Hebrew)
(RV1909) Porque yo lo he conocido, sé que mandará a sus hijos y a su casa después de sí, (Hebrew)
(RV1960) Porque yo sé que mandará a sus hijos y a su casa después de sí, (LXX)
In Genesis 18:19 we have an example of an omission made in the Septuagint and the translations that follow it. God said regarding Abraham, "I know him." This phrase is removed in the Septuagint. The KJV, RVG, and RV1909 follow the Hebrew and the RV1960 and NIV follow the Septuagint in removing the phrase.
Other examples
In my comparisons of different Bible versions, I have found that the RV1960 Spanish Bible shows a particular affinity for the Septuagint. It is interesting that it will often follow the LXX even when the NIV does not. In Genesis 24:39 the KJV and Hebrew read, "And I said unto my master, Peradventure the woman will not follow me." The RV1960 omits the phrase "unto my master" and the NIV includes it. This phrase is included in the Hebrew Masoretic but excluded in the LXX.
Genesis 21:9 shows another significant departure from the Hebrew in the RV1960. The KJV and Hebrew read, "And Sarah saw the son of Hagar the Egyptian, which she had born unto Abraham, mocking." The LXX and RV1960 add the phrase "with Isaac her son." The NIV follows the Hebrew.
The LXX also adds the phrase "why have ye stolen my silver cup?" to Genesis 44:4-5. This phrase is not in the Hebrew. The RV1960 includes this phrase from the LXX and the NIV does not.
In Esther 8:10 it reads, " And he wrote in the king Ahasuerus’ name, and sealed it with the king’s ring, and sent letters by posts on horseback, and riders on mules, camels, and young dromedaries:" The LXX does not mention the animals, it reads: "And they were written by order of the king, and sealed with his ring, and they sent the letters by the posts:" The RV1960 and NIV both only mention the horses, therefore following a mixture of the two readings.
Job 13:13 omits the phrase "let me alone" in the LXX. The RV1960 and the NIV follow its example and read the same.
In Song of Solomon 2:10 the KJV and Hebrew read, "My beloved spake, and said unto me, Rise up, my love, my fair one, and come away." The LXX changes "my love" to "my companion." The RV1960 follows this corrupt reading and says "amiga" (friend) and the NIV follows closer to the Hebrew with "darling."
There are many other examples, but these should be sufficient to show that many popular translations in English, Spanish, and other languages often leave the Hebrew reading to follow the corrupt LXX. These versions pick and choose what text to follow depending on the preferences of the translators. Their translation committees were not loyal to any text, but rather to what was right in their own eyes. The KJV in English and RVG in Spanish are faithful to the Hebrew Masoretic Text, and do not follow the corrupt LXX.
[1] Jack Moorman, Forever Settled: A Survey of the Documents and History of the Bible, (Collingswood, N.J.: The Dean Burgon Society Press, 1999). 9.
[2] Drew Longacre, «Masoretas», ed. John D. Barry y Lazarus Wentz, Diccionario Bíblico Lexham, (Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press, 2014).
[3] Jack Moorman, Forever Settled: A Survey of the Documents and History of the Bible, 9.
[4] Ibid.
[5] Ibid. 10.
[6] David Otis Fuller, Which Bible, quoting Yigael Yadin, MASADA: Herod's Fortress and the Zealot's Las Stand. (Grand Rapids, MI: Grand Rapids International Publications, 1995), 10.
[7] Ibid. 9.
[8] J. William Johnston, “Septuagint,” ed. John D. Barry et al., The Lexham Bible Dictionary.
[9] Ibid.
[10] F. L. Cross and Elizabeth A. Livingstone, eds., The Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church, 1493.
[11] Jack Moorman, Forever Settled: A Survey of the Documents and History of the Bible, 14.
[12] Tim McLay, «Septuagint», ed. David Noel Freedman, Allen C. Myers, y Astrid B. Beck, Eerdmans dictionary of the Bible, (Grand Rapids, MI: W.B. Eerdmans, 2000), 1185.
[13] Lancelot Charles Lee Brenton, The Septuagint Version of the Old Testament: English Translation (London: Samuel Bagster and Sons, 1870), Ge 5:26.
[14] Douglas Estes, «Apócrifos», ed. John D. Barry y Lazarus Wentz, Diccionario Bíblico Lexham, (Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press, 2014).
[15] New Revised Standard Version (Tobit 6:5-9)
[16] Jack Moorman, Forever Settled: A Survey of the Documents and History of the Bible, 22.
[17] Ibid, 18.
[18] Ibid, 21.
Comentários