there's a good reason why the orthodox church still uses the septuagint for its old testament

The Masoretic Text (MT) was an alteration of significant portions of the Square Hebrew Old Testament that began early (noted by the Talmud and Mishnah showing conflicting texts, contradictions, and multiple competing rabbis making alterations) though Jews also used the Septuagint (translated from the Square Hebrew around the mid third century BC), and older than the MT; The MT are hardly original scriptures anyway. See Jeremiah 8:8 (Septuagint) concerning the MT. Paleo Hebrew, used from the 12th to 6th century BC (around 2000 years older than the MT), gave way to Square Hebrew (around 1300 years older than the MT), which then eventually gave way to Greek, as evidenced by the Septuagint, which is around 1000 years older than certain MT portions. The Septuagint predates Christianity, used when Greek became the lingua franca, and its use in synagogues by Jews around the Mediterranean was substantial. Paleo Hebrew, Square Hebrew, and the Septuagint (LXX) within the Dead Sea Scrolls (DSS) preserve the originals, and overwhelmingly disagree with the MT in numerous instances. 1.) Exodus 1:5 in the DSS Square Hebrew agrees with the Septuagint against the MT that all the souls from Jacob were 75, not 70 which the MT claims. 2.) The older Square Hebrew in the DSS agrees with the Septuagint against the MT for Deut. 32:8-9 in using Sons/angels of God and not sons of Israel. 3.) The Square Hebrew in the DSS for Deuteronomy 32:43 lines up with the Septuagint against the MT. 4.) The Septuagint for 1 and 2 Samuel are backed up by 3 DSS and the MT is known among scholars as botching 1 and 2 Samuel badly. 5.) The MT wrongly has Saul becoming King at age one and ruling for two years. 6.) The MT actually left out an entire line from a Psalm that the Square Hebrew and the Septuagint preserved, thus the so-called masters of vowel memorization not only forgot vowels but also consonants. 7.) Psalm 40:6: a messianic proof text for the Incarnation: The MT: Thou hast dug out my ears. The Septuagint: A body thou hast prepared for me. 8.) Concerning another messianic psalm, Psalm 22:16/17, the DSS Square Hebrew and lines up with the Septuagint against the MT. 9.) Baruch, Sirach, Tobit, and Psalm 151 are written in Hebrew in the DSS. 10.) ▪︎The chronologies of Genesis 5, 11 of the Paleo Hebrew and the Septuagint line up against the MT. ▪︎Literary sources before 100 AD line up with the LXX not the MT on this: Josephus and Philo (30/70 AD) did not use the Septuagint to come to their conclusion that lines up with the Septuagint. ▪︎Eupolemus, the Jewish 2nd century BC historian's chronology, comes close to aligning with the Paleo Hebrew and Septuagint and not the MT. ▪︎Jewish Demetrius the Chronicler's (3rd century BC) chronology comes very close to the Paleo Hebrew and Septuagint and against the MT. ▪︎biblearchaeology.org/research/biblical-chronologies/4349-mt-sp-or-lxx-deciphering-a-chronological-and-textual-conundrum-in-genesis-5 Since synagogues around the Mediterranean used Septuagint and Square Hebrew, even in Palestine, Greek was the lingua franca, Jesus grew up near Sepphoris where Hebrew and Greek were both spoken and where Joseph could ply his trade, Christ quoted the scriptures, spoke to the Syrophoenician woman, and Mark/Luke were written to Romans/Greeks, some will be hard-pressed to prove Jesus used only Hebrew. Concerning key messianic scriptures, Catholics, Copts, Orthodox, and Protestants see that the leaven of the rabbis and then the Masoretes seemed to target scriptures that point to Jesus Christ. The Paleo Hebrew, Square Hebrew, and the Septuagint all agree with each other against the MT far more than they disagree, thus the starting point is to sideline the MT. There are dozens and dozens of instances where the, Paleo Hebrew, Square Hebrew, and the Septuagint agree against the MT: By the mouth of 2 or 3 witnesses let every word be established. Deut. 19:15; 2 Cor. 13:1.

The Septuagint originally was not a translation of the whole old testament into Greek. It was a translation of the first five books of Moses into Greek. All later translations were all called Septuagint. The Septuagint is not one translation but many with the same name.

According to Jewish history the Septuagint was a translation of the Torah into Greek made by 72 elders in the year 246 Before Christ

Who is speaking?

One can rely on the Septuagint. It was Gods will for the Hebrew scripture to be translated into Greek 300 years before Christ. It was an authoritative version and received in the Jewish diaspora. Jesus quotes it. The Church and Apostles used it to convince Israel that Jesus was the Messiah. The NT was also written in Greek. Why? It was always the will of God for the Gospel to be a universal faith.

The Aleppo text is not partially burnt. It was never in the fire. Part of it however was removed, possibly because somebody didn't like that particular part of the scriptures or they're trying to keep it for some other purpose which is heretofore unknown.

The Septuagint is interesting from its own perspective. The western translations of the Bible cognates pretty much to the Hebrew texts so you will be reading very similar meanings. In other words if you pick for instance any English version youll find out that they match pretty accurately to the Hebrew. The Ancient Greek having the same contents it also contains some ideas and descriptions that come to suface when are read from the Ancient Greek prespective not being evident for the reader in the modern langs. Sometimes it makes you think you are reading about "liberal arts" as from the middle ages. Other times it seems to be describing some practical concepts of Solomonic magic. Sometimes it seems to be providing with accurate historic descriptions and meanings for some passages that otherwise remain obscure. Even the different names of God become clearer since it differenciates better what is going on from one specific situation to another. That opens up the question in the reader about if the Ancient Greek still contains untouched some of the contents of the original wrtings or if there is more about to the story on how the old Testament got to become what it is today.

The vast majority of NT quotes/references match LXX rather than MT, because the MT was developed by NON-BELIEVING Masorete Jews. Also, the MT contains altered chronologies and messianic prophesies. There is literally evidence and motive that the MT was subtly altered in an attempt to undermine Christianity, because the Apostles and the pre-nicene church ALL used the LXX, because the majority of people at that time spoke Greek. Even the common Jew spoke Koine-Greek.

Usually, things were dropped out rather than added. Which is why I think generally the Majority texts are superior than the Critical texts.

👍

My copy of esv doesn't have 1 Sam 10:28??!!

as if Jesus was joking in Matt 16:6-12....

greetings the interlinear is remarkable alexandrian and new testament Ελληνικη ΑΩ

AND TATTOOS SIMPLY REMIND US NOT TO WRITE UPON OURSELVES FOR WE ARE THE SCROLLS.

I find it odd the speaker says the scrolls are even “more messianic” than our latest LXX manuscript. The “virgin” for example in Isaiah is translated “alma” in the scrolls (young woman). So to say there is nothing of theological importance to the Christian is simply bs.

So what kind of Unitarian are you? Arian, Socinian, or Strict Unitarian

Jesus said, you who hide the key of knowledge...Luke 11 : 52 ...to Pharisees, because they replaced the Torah with the Talmud. Talmud doesn't teach people how to enter the kingdom of God by repentance.

Oh your psalm. The N word was not there for a reason and it's clearly copied from a later line by the dead sea scroll text.

I could corroborate none of his claims with respect to his examples and I have all relevant texts in front of me. The King James Version matches the Septuagint matches the Artscroll. The examples are absent from the translations of the Dead Sea Scrolls that I have. So it IS possible that a Dead Sea scroll differs from all of these but NOT that the Septuagint had the verses. Sadly. I was hoping to see the evidence of his claims.

In a synagogue in the 1st century, one could only read the Hebrew scrolls or the Targum (a translation of the Hebrew Bible into Aramaic). Greek was forbidden. Recall that Antiochus Epiphanes desecrated the Solomon’s temple circa 170 BC. Thus, the need for Herod to build the 2nd temple. The Jews of the 1st century despised the Greeks, for that and other reasons. The only evidence for a BC Septuagint is the letter of Aristeas, which no one believers but everyone quotes. It is a fantastic tale (read fantasy). There is no reference to a Septuagint prior to 50 AD (+/-). If you trace all the reference to a BC Septuagint, you will find that each and every on them references the Letter of Aristeas in one form or another. So, the only witness to a BC Septuagint is the Letter of Aristeas (LOA) If one believes the LOA, one has to believe also that the 10 northern tribes of Israel were not dispersed to four winds after 721 BC. From this diaspora they never returned. Rather you have to believe that they were still in Israel in 285 BC, since the LOA claims that 12 scribes from each of the 12 tribes of Israel were assembled in Egypt. Incidentally, a land to which the Jews were forbidden ever to return to. Deuteronomy 28:68. Only the Levites were to handle the scriptures (with the exception of the King who had to make a copy for himself). So, one has to add to that belief that 72 scribes (not Levites) defiled themselves among the Greeks and defied the scriptures and God’s wishes in order to handle the scriptures as well as going to a land to which they were forbidden ever to return. More so, add to that belief, that 72 scribes, each without a copy of the Hebrew scriptures, translated them from memory into Greek in 72 days and every single word was identical all the while being locked up in 72 chambers on the isle of Pharos without any collaboration between them. And by the way, why is it called LXX "The 70"? And may I say ”Incidentally” again? Incidentally, the Pharos light house was not built until 280 BC, 3 years after the blessed event. A minor point. To sum up, we are to believe that God inspired the work of 72 (not 70) disobedient, non-Levitical scribes who rendered 72 identical copies of the Hebrew scriptures from memory into Greek. Really? Incidentally, the LOA section 176 also says that the whole scroll was written in gold. Really? Where is it? You’d think that someone would have a vested interest in preserving such a priceless document. Where is it? It doesn’t exist! Finally, If you were to get a copy of the Septuagint, you would find that it is nothing more than the Old Testament portions of the codex Alexandrinus, the codex Sinaiticus and the codex Vaticanus, along with the Apocrypha. If you believe that Jesus quoted from the Septuagint, you have to also believe that Jesus endorsed the Apocrypha. Including purgatory! Really?

How come you don't just go back to Egypt and the pyramid text predating all of this plagiarism or Mesopotamia 2000 BCE's stone tablet? It is written in stone

If it's translated through latin it's garbage