Introduction
The Septuagint (LXX)—the Greek translation of the Hebrew Bible from the 3rd century BCE—is one of the oldest surviving biblical manuscripts. However, its validity is often questioned, particularly by those who regard the Masoretic Text (the standard Hebrew text of Judaism) as the only authoritative version. This article will demonstrate that the Septuagint is a valid text, supported by strong historical foundations, and even used by Jesus and the early church.
---
1. The Origins of the Septuagint: A Royal Project or a Community Need?
a. The Letter of Aristeas Tradition
According to the Letter of Aristeas (2nd century BCE), the Septuagint was translated by 72 Jewish scholars in Alexandria at the request of King Ptolemy II Philadelphus (285–246 BCE) for the Library of Alexandria. While containing legendary elements, its core narrative is supported by:
- Historical evidence: The Jewish diaspora in Egypt primarily spoke Greek and needed Scripture in their language.
- Royal patronage: The Ptolemaic kings actively supported major intellectual projects, including religious translations.
b. A Gradual Process
The Septuagint was not completed at once but developed in stages:
- The Torah (Pentateuch) was translated first (c. 280–250 BCE).
- The Prophets & Writings followed in the 2nd–1st centuries BCE.
- Some books (e.g., Daniel) later received expanded editions.
---
2. The Septuagint’s Textual Superiority Over the Masoretic Text
a. Based on Older Manuscripts
The Masoretic Text (the current Jewish standard) was only standardized around the 6th–10th centuries CE, whereas the LXX reflects Hebrew manuscripts from the 4th–3rd centuries BCE. Evidence includes:
- Dead Sea Scrolls:
- 4QJerᵇ (a Jeremiah manuscript) aligns more closely with the LXX than the Masoretic Text.
- 4QSamᵃ (a Samuel manuscript) supports LXX readings.
- The Samaritan Pentateuch: Also shares variants with the LXX.
b. Significant Differences from the Masoretic Text
Some LXX books have distinct structures, such as:
1. Jeremiah:
- The LXX is 1/6 shorter and has a different arrangement.
- 4QJerᵇ confirms that this shorter version existed in ancient Hebrew tradition.
2. Job:
- The LXX is ~1/5 shorter, indicating an alternate Hebrew source.
3. Daniel:
- The LXX includes deuterocanonical additions (Susanna, Prayer of Azariah) absent in the Masoretic Text.
This proves that the LXX is not merely a translation but represents a legitimate, older Hebrew textual tradition.
---
3. The Septuagint’s Use in the New Testament and the Early Church
a. Jesus and the Apostles Quoted the LXX
- Matthew 1:23 ("Immanuel") quotes Isaiah 7:14 from the LXX (using παρθένος/parthenos = "virgin"), not the Masoretic Text ("almah" = young woman).
- Acts 15:16–17 cites Amos 9:11–12 following the LXX, not the Masoretic Text.
- Hebrews 10:5–7 quotes Psalm 40:6–8 from the LXX.
b. Church Fathers Recognized the LXX’s Authority
- Philo of Alexandria: Considered the LXX an inspired translation.
- Justin Martyr: Argued that the LXX was more accurate than contemporary Jewish texts.
- Origen: Created the Hexapla (a six-column Bible edition) with the LXX as its foundation.
c. The Canon of Orthodox & Catholic Churches
- Eastern (Orthodox) and Catholic Churches use the LXX as the basis for the Old Testament, including deuterocanonical books (Tobit, Judith, Wisdom, etc.).
---
4. Criticisms of the Septuagint and Responses
a. Accusations of "Inaccurate Translation"
- Fact: Differences between the LXX and Masoretic Text stem from divergent Hebrew source texts (Vorlage), not errors.
- Evidence: The Dead Sea Scrolls confirm that LXX variants existed in ancient Hebrew tradition.
b. "The LXX Was Only for Greeks, Not Hebrews"
- Response:
- Hellenistic Jews (including Philo) regarded the LXX as valid.
- Early Jewish Christians (e.g., the Antioch church) also used the LXX.
- Only after the Temple’s destruction (70 CE) did Rabbinic Judaism reject the LXX in favor of the Masoretic Text.
---
5. Conclusion: Why the Septuagint is Valid and Essential
1. Based on older Hebrew manuscripts than the Masoretic Text.
2. Used by Jesus, the apostles, and the early church.
3. Recognized by Eastern and Western Christian traditions for centuries.
4. Confirmed by archaeological discoveries (Dead Sea Scrolls).
The Septuagint is not merely a "Greek translation" but a crucial witness to the authentic and authoritative biblical text. Its rejection often stems from later theological bias, not historical evidence.
Questions for Further Discussion
- Is the LXX more accurate than the Masoretic Text?
- Why do Protestant traditions often reject the LXX’s deuterocanonical books?
- How does the LXX contribute to modern biblical textual criticism?
This article proves that the Septuagint is a valid, historically grounded, and theologically significant text essential for a complete understanding of Scripture.
👉Read Other Article (Click or Tap Here)
God bless,
17 August 2025
Mantiri AAM
Komentar
Posting Komentar