{"id":1518,"date":"2021-02-22T13:48:32","date_gmt":"2021-02-22T18:48:32","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/abudinen.com\/blog\/?p=1518"},"modified":"2021-05-11T21:15:32","modified_gmt":"2021-05-12T02:15:32","slug":"hebrew-and-septuagint","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/abudinen.com\/blog\/2021\/02\/22\/hebrew-and-septuagint\/","title":{"rendered":"Hebrew and septuagint"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

Por misericordia de Dios conf\u00edamos plenamente en el unico hombre perfecto, Jes\u00fas. Quien entregandose a si mismo pidio perdon por quienes le crucificaron.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

El no nos demanda “creer ciegamente”. Nos confronta con la verdad. Consigo mismo. Nos exhorta, sin importar de qu\u00e9 o qui\u00e9n se trate, a remitirnos a las pruebas. No afirmar sin conocer cada variable de un pensamiento. Acuerdate, el enga\u00f1o es enga\u00f1o porque contiene “verdades”. Los hindus “creen ciegamente”. Los “ateos” dudan. Amemos a la verdad. Sigamos a cristo.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

About esdras<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

Ezra and nehemiah vs 1 and 2 esdras (sometimes called 3 and 4 ezra)<\/p>\n\n\n\n

https:\/\/thejesusquestion.org\/2015\/12\/21\/the-two-genealogies-of-jesus-the-curse-of-jeconiah-and-the-royal-line-of-david\/
https:\/\/shamelesspopery.com\/did-the-council-of-carthage-have-one-book-too-many\/
2 esdras 7:28 apocrypha
latin ezra justino martir. Did?
https:\/\/www.biblegateway.com\/passage\/?search=2%20Esdras%203&version=NRSV&interface=amp
https:\/\/pseudepigrapha.org\/docs\/intro\/4Ezra
http:\/\/www.earlyjewishwritings.com\/2esdras.html<\/p>\n\n\n\n

About lxx and mt<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

19f de 2021 El texto base es el masoretico (hebreo). Pero la traducci\u00f3n, contenido y n\u00fameros correctos son los de la septuaginta m\u00e1s lo del masoretico. Judios quienes no aceptaron a Jes\u00fas cortaron el texto, tradujeron mal y cambiaron los n\u00fameros para no entrar ni dejar entrar a la salvaci\u00f3n.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Los preteristas enga\u00f1an y est\u00e1n enga\u00f1ados porque no conocen el antiguo testamento.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Las dos genealog\u00edas de mateo y Lucas son de Jos\u00e9. Eusebius lo explica.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

La maldici\u00f3n de jeconias tendr\u00eda dos explicaciones cual la de tratarse de otro jeconias parecer\u00eda ser la acertada y no la de Dios perdonandolo.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Los angeles no se casan ni se dan en casamiento porque la resurrecci\u00f3n no es para casarnos sino para obtener cuerpos glorificados<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Job 42:7
Isa\u00edas 61:1
Exodus 1:5 12:40
Genesis 5 11<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Sinaiticus 42:17 long verse<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Weymouth nt
Amplified bible<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Chronology review according to PostApostolicChurch<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

Neo assyrian empire 720?
Neo babylonian 586?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Rule of persia 538 424 bc
Ezra haggai zachariah explicit chronology<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Sheshbazzar = zerubbabel? ezra 1 5:13-16
Ahasuerus
Cyrus de great, Darius I = 1 esdras<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Darius the made? Cyaxares ii 550 536? Xenophon?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

3 waves of captives
She 536 bc
Zeru 520bc
Ezra 458
(Neh 444bc)<\/p>\n\n\n\n

—
Ahasuerus Daniel 9 ezra 4 artaxerxes? Xerxes? Isn’t clear?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

—
Ahasuerus in esther
Structure of the name
Josephus
Jerome
Greek septuagint artaxerxes<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Xerxes I modern day historians<\/p>\n\n\n\n

—
Malachi
Xerubabel temple?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Chronology of the Jews under the Persian (Achaemenid) Empire<\/strong> according to www.youtube.com\/PostApostolicChurch. For classical chronology go to Biblical figures identified<\/a>. For more viewpoints visit interpretation and viewpoints<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

  1. Cyrus the Great becomes king of Persia.<\/li>
  2. Cyrus the Great conquers Media and subjugates them.
    539, Oct 12. Darius the Mede (Cyaxares II), king of Media and subject of Cyrus, conquers Babylon.<\/li>
  3. Daniel and the lions’ den (Dan 6).<\/li>
  4. Daniel’s vision of the 70 weeks (Dan 9).<\/li>
  5. Darius peaceably gives Median Empire to Cyrus, who is king of Persia, Media, and Babylonia.<\/li>
  6. Cyrus decrees that God\u2019s house is to be rebuilt and appoints Sheshbazzar as governor of Judah (Ezra 1,
    2Chr 36:22-23). Sheshbazzar begins the foundation but does not finish it (see Ezra 1:8-11, 5:14-16).
    536-530. Daniel and the story of Bel and the Dragon (see Dan 14 in LXX).<\/li>
  7. Daniel\u2019s visions about Persia and Greece (Dan 10-12).<\/li>
  8. Cambyses II succeeds Cyrus the Great.<\/li>
  9. Darius I succeeds Bardiya, who had succeeded Cambyses and reigned a few months.
    520, Mar-Apr. Zerubbabel\u2019s contest with the bodyguards. He is appointed as governor (1 Esdras 3:1-5:6).
    520, Mar-Sep. Zerubbabel and a wave of captives return to Judah (Ezra 2).
    520, Aug-Sep. God through Haggai commands to rebuild the temple (Hag 1).
    520, Sep-Oct. The altar is built and sacrifices resumed (Ezra 3:1-7).
    520, Sep-Oct. Work on the temple is progressing (Hag 2:1-9).
    520, Oct-Nov. Remember the folly of your ancestors (Zech 1:1-6).
    520, Nov-Dec. Promises from God, poverty turned to prosperity (Hag 2:10-23).
    519, Jan-Feb. The first four visions given to Zechariah (Zech 1:7-3:31).
    519, Feb-Apr. Opposition to the temple; Tattenai becomes a friend (Ezra 4:1-5,4:24-6:14).
    519, Apr-May. The second four visions given to Zechariah (Zech 4-6).
    519, Apr-May. Foundation finished (Ezra 3:8-13).
    518, Nov-Dec. God’s promises and instructions on obedience (Zech 7-8).
    515, Feb. The temple is completed (Ezra 6:15-22).
    515 or later. God’s prophecies and the future of God’s people (Zech 9-14).<\/li>
  10. Xerxes I succeeds Darius I.<\/li>
  11. Artaxerxes I succeeds Xerxes I.<\/li>
  12. Artaxerxes removes Queen Vasti and looks for a new queen (Esther 1).
    459 or earlier. Esther becomes a candidate for queen (Esther 2:1-14).
    458, Mar-Apr. Ezra and another wave of captives leave Persia (Ezra 7:1-8:31).
    458, Jul-Aug. Ezra and the wave of captives arrive at Jerusalem (Ezra 8:32-36).
    458, Nov – 457, Apr. The matter of Jews who married foreign wives (Ezra 9-10).
    457, Feb-Mar. Esther becomes queen to Artaxerxes (Esther 2:15-23).
    456-453. Previous inhabitants of Judah have Artaxerxes halt the rebuilding of Jerusalem (Ezra 4:6-23).
    453, Mar – 452, Feb. Queen Esther foils Haman’s plot and saves the Jews (Esther 3-10).
    445, Nov-Dec. Nehemiah hears about the ruins of Jerusalem (Neh 1).
    444, Mar-Apr. Nehemiah asks Artaxerxes I to be sent to Judah as governor (Neh 2:1-10).
    444, Jul-Sep. Building the wall, opposition to it, finding Ezra 2 (Neh 2:11-7:73).
    444, Sep-Nov. Reading of the Law by Ezra, celebrating Festival of Booths, sealing of Levite vows (Neh 8-10).<\/li>
  13. Resettling Jerusalem and dedication of the wall (Neh 11-12).<\/li>
  14. Nehemiah returns to Persia (see Neh 5:14 and 13:6).
    ? Malachi prophesies against unrighteous worship (Mal 1-4).
    Sometime between 431-424. Nehemiah returns to correct various sins (Neh 13).<\/li>
  15. Xerxes II succeeds Artaxerxes I and reigns 45 days.<\/li>
  16. Sogdianus succeeds Xerxes II and reigned 6.5 months.<\/li>
  17. Darius II succeeds Sogdianus.<\/li>
  18. Artaxerxes II succeeds Darius II.<\/li>
  19. Artaxerxes III succeeds Artaxerxes II.<\/li>
  20. Artaxerxes IV succeeds Artaxerxes III.<\/li>
  21. Darius III, the last king of the Persain Empire, succeeds Artaxerxes IV.<\/li><\/ol>\n\n\n\n

    —
    Because of the reformers mt got translated
    On this origen ad 235 anf vol 4 page 387<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    —
    Among those now presuming to expound the scripture (virgin)
    Irenaeus ad 180 and vol I page451<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    What I have said is  I think, sufficient to prove that it would be nothing wonderful if this history were true, and the licentious and cruel attack was actually made on Susanna by those
    Origin ad 235 and, vol 4, page 388-389
    Ref to is 1.10<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Greek oldt 200 ad against lxx
    Theodotion, aquila of sinope, symmanchus<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Siglo i – iii mateo 6:13 la didache, policarpo 1 juan 4:3, justino lucas 22:43-44, taciano marcos 9:24, ireneo juan 1:18 tc unigenito Dios hechos 8:37 lucas 23:34, tertuliano juan 5:3b-4 1 corintios 14:47, hipolito juan 3:13, cipriano 1 juan 5:7<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    http:\/\/textusreceptusbibles.com\/Are_Older_Manuscripts_More_Reliable<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Read about job 29:17 lxx?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    https:\/\/www.bl.uk\/collection-items\/codex-sinaiticushttps:\/\/en.katabiblon.com\/us\/index.php?text=LXX&book=3Kgs&ch=17https:\/\/truthsnitch.com\/tag\/book-of-jasher\/https:\/\/septuaginta-interlineal.blogspot.com\/?m=1<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

    About pork https:\/\/medium.com\/@s.mobarak03\/10-reasons-why-you-should-not-eat-pork-7b43a8a8d65c<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    https:\/\/hermeneutics.stackexchange.com\/questions\/13770\/proverbs-differences-between-the-lxx-and-the-mt ??
    https:\/\/en.m.wikipedia.org\/wiki\/Septuagint_manuscripts<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    The Merneptah Stela can be seen in the Cairo Museum, Egypt. It specifically mentions Israel, and is dated to around 1215 BC. This discovery is just one of many that flatly contradicts secular theories about the development of the Old Testament. Mike Luddeni.<\/strong>
    https:\/\/biblearchaeology.org\/?id=2667:the-curious-history-of-the-editor-in-biblical-criticism&catid=11
    Humans ramains at gezer
    The Name Yahweh in Egyptian Hieroglyphic Texts<\/strong>
    https:\/\/biblearchaeology.org\/research\/chronological-categories\/exodus-era\/3233-the-name-yahweh-in-egyptian-hieroglyphic-texts<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    http:\/\/postapostolicchurch.blogspot.com\/?m=1<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Emanuel tov reliable source<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Was there a \u201cSeptuagint Canon\u201d?<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

    REVIEW: https:\/\/bijbelvorser.wordpress.com\/2018\/03\/26\/was-there-a-septuagint-canon\/<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    \nhttps:\/\/academic.logos.com\/was-there-a-septuagint-canon\/\n<\/div><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

    Jobab ben Zerah<\/strong>
    Gen 36 job<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    http:\/\/www.agapebiblestudy.com\/documents\/Is%20the%20Catholic%20Old%20Testament%20Accurate.htm<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Matthew 2:6 mic 5:2 neither lxx mt
    Matt 2:15 ho 11:1 \u05dc\u05d1\u05e0\u05d9 mt 1 samuel 3:6
    Matt 2:18 jer 31:15 mt<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Mt lxx trans comme + strong
    Greek trans comme + strong<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Peshita how people talked about the word en el periodo exilico o postexilico<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    On February 27, 380, in Thessaloniki, the Eastern Roman Emperor Theodosius I (347 – 395) signed a decree in the presence of the Western Roman Emperor Valentinian II (371 – 392) that made Christianity<\/strong> the religion<\/strong> of the state<\/strong> and “punished the practice of pagan rituals”.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    How many different septuagint-based Bible translations are there? Where can one find them?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Although many Catholic and Orthodox Bibles base their book order on the Septuagint, most don\u2019t base their translation on the Greek Septuagint. As the Introduction to the New Jerusalem Bible states:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    For the Old Testament the “Masoretic Text” established in the 8-9th centuries AD by Jewish scholars, is used. Only when this presents insuperable difficulties have emendations or other versions, such as the ancient Greek translation begun in 200 BC at Alexandria, the “Septuagint” (LXX), been used.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Jesus disciples didn’t use the septuagint nor the masoretic but an hebrew copy that was not the masoretic nor the septuagint. The septuagint has more similarities with that copy they used.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    https:\/\/github.com\/bibleforge\/BibleForgeDBhttps:\/\/github.com\/openscriptures\/morphhb<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Vetus Latina<\/em><\/strong> es el nombre colectivo dado a los textos b\u00edblicos en Lat\u00edn, que fueron traducidos a partir del siglo II, desde la lengua griega (Septuaginta<\/em> o Versi\u00f3n de los Setenta<\/em> para la mayor\u00eda de los libros del Antiguo Testamento y originales griegos para los libros del Nuevo Testamento), antes que la Vulgata de san Jer\u00f3nimo se convirtiera en el est\u00e1ndar de la Biblia para los cristianos latino-parlantes en occidente. La frase Vetus Latina<\/em> significa “Latina vieja” en lat\u00edn, y la Vetus Latina a veces es conocida como la Antigua Biblia Latina<\/strong>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    https:\/\/www.jstor.org\/stable\/20503921?read-now=1&refreqid=excelsior%3A70ae2f43d1b9ef37066a692d8e293778&seq=2#page_scan_tab_contents<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

    https:\/\/www.jstor.org\/stable\/43048677?seq=1<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

    LXX<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

    Ptomely II lighthouse of alexandria<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Lighthouse of Alexandria, also called Pharos of Alexandria<\/strong>, one of the Seven Wonders of the World and the most famous lighthouse in antiquity. It was a technological triumph and is the archetype of all lighthouses since.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    The nt quote the old testament a few hundred times. 20% equals but 80% bt the 2 text. 90% lxx 10% mt<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Some of the Dead Sea Scrolls<\/em> actually have more in common with the Greek Septuagint<\/em> than the traditional Hebrew Masoretic Text.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    The Masoretic Text<\/a> is a traditional Hebrew text finalized by Jewish scholars around 1000 C.E. The Septuagint is a Greek translation of the Torah created by the Jews of Alexandria in the third century B.C.E. (The other books of the Hebrew Bible were translated over the course of the following century.)<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Three Torah scrolls (talmud)<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

    A Talmudic story, perhaps referring to an earlier time, relates that three Torah scrolls were found in the Temple court but were at variance with each other. The differences were then resolved by majority decision among the three.[10]<\/a><\/sup><\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Were There Three Torah-Scrolls in the Azarah? Solomon Zeitlin<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    https:\/\/www.jstor.org\/stable\/1453840?seq=1<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Mr Henry about LXX<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

    DBSJ 24 (2019): 119\u2013154 ON THE AUTHENTICITY OF KAINAN,<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    SON OF ARPACHSHAD by Henry B. Smith Jr., with Kris J. Udd1<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    A: https:\/\/youtu.be\/VI1yRTC6kGE<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Thanks for the video. I\u2019ve watched this previously and had correspondence with the creator Nathan Hoffman.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    See my notes below.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Thanks, Henry<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    ______________<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Please read my two articles on Kainan here:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Smith Jr., Henry B., “New Evidence for Kainan in New Testament and LXX Papyri<\/a>,” Bible and Spade<\/em> 31, no. 3 (Summer 2018): 70-77.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Smith Jr., Henry B. and Kris J. Udd., “On the Authenticity of Kainan, Son of Arpachshad<\/a>.” Detroit Baptist Seminary Journal<\/em> 24 (2019): 119-154.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Nathan\u2019s treatment of Josephus is also inaccurate. He uses the Whiston translation, which is now almost 300 years old. You can find my discussion of Josephus in the ICC article:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Smith Jr., Henry B., “The Case for the Septuagint’s Chronology in Genesis 5 and 11,”<\/a> In Proceedings of the Eighth International Conference on Creationism<\/em> (2018), ed. J.H. Whitmore, pp. 117\u2013132. Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania: Creation Science Fellowship.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    1. Nathan is incorrect in saying that the earliest MSS of Luke and Genesis lack Kainan. Papyrus 911 (late 3rd<\/sup> century AD) of the LXX contains Kainan, as does Papyrus 4 of Luke 3 (mid to late 2nd<\/sup> century AD). P75 is indeterminable, but almost always cited as lacking Kainan. This is not demonstrable from the extant fragment of Luke 3 in P75. Only one MS lacks Kainan for Luke: Codex Bezae. Bezae is inferior for Luke 3, as it actually inserts Matthew\u2019s genealogy into the text of Luke for the list from Solomon to Jesus. Interestingly, this same insertion is also found in Hippolytus of Rome (225 AD), possibly indicating the corruption was in Hippolytus\u2019 MS of Luke. HOWEVER, Hippolytus includes Kainan in Gen 10, 11 and Luke 3:36. Over 45 MSS of Luke include Kainan in 3:36.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    2. Nathan has the right idea in trying to ascribe adequate motive to the changing of the numbers. The Melchizedek=Shem theory, while providing adequate motive, cannot account for all the evidence. In particular, it cannot explain the shorter chronology of the MT in Gen 5, which has no bearing on the relationship between Mel and Shem. If Nathan subscribed to the idea that the MT correctly preserves Gen 5, then he would have to posit a motive for the LXX inflating the antediluvian chronology. As far as I know, none exists. Further, Josephus and Liber Biblicarum Antiquitatum<\/em> both used a Hebrew text of Genesis with the longer antediluvian chronology. Nathan\u2019s theory cannot explain this data adequately. That being said, the Mel=Shem Jewish exegetical tradition probably DID arise in response to the NT book of Hebrews\u2019 connecting Jesus with Melchizedek. Since the MT\u2019s chronology was already deflated by the rabbis, they were able to connect Mel and Shem as an apologetic against the Christian connection with Jesus in Hebrews. There is no evidence of this exegetical tradition in the Jewish literature before the destruction of the Temple. The Melchizedek Document from Qumran makes no such connection, for example.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    3. Shem outliving Abraham in the MT (as well as Arpachshad and Eber outliving him) is actually an internal contradiction when compared to the statement in Genesis 25:8 that Abe \u201cdied in a good, old age, an old man, full of years.\u201d With the MT\u2019s chronology, Abe\u2019s contemporaries would have been living twice as long as him, if not longer. 175 would have been young! Only in the SP\/LXX post-Flood chronology does this statement make sense. This is the internal argument that demonstrates the MT\u2019s deliberate deflation. Nathan\u2019s argument has the right idea, but is too subjective. For different reasons, Whitcomb\/Morris make the same subjective argument \u201cit just cannot be correct that Shem is a contemporary of Abraham.\u201d Genesis 25:8 removes the subjectivity and makes the argument grounded in Scripture instead. The MT\u2019s corruption is exposed by the authoritative witness of Gen 25:8. The rabbis failed to account for it.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Q: I was seeing the differences between LXX and mt. Lxx Job 42:17 verse is longer. Are we meant to believe all the septuagint text that aren’t found in the mt?
    I have heard there are many versions of the lxx. If so which one is the most reliable?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    A: Hi, thanks for your questions. I appreciate them! With the LXX, each individual book and each situation has to be evaluated on its own merits. The case of Gen 5\/11 is its own unique problem. Job was translated at a different time and place. It is also a much different kind of work than Genesis. Perhaps the attached article by Peter Gentry can be helpful. Warning- it is deep and needs careful reading. He explains Job in some places, as he has studied it extensively. See page 28, for example. Blessings, Henry<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    THE TEXT OF THE OLD TESTAMENT Peter j gentry – JETS 52\/1 (March 2009) 19-45<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Q: Thanks for that source. I have started reading it but I have a question before going any further.
    Why is this greek version of job finishing with 29:17 and reading the same that in 42:17 of the masoretic text?In brenton LXX it finishes with a longer version than the 42:17 masoretic verse.
    Is this greek old testament I attached to you a corrupted old testament or it is a different lxx version? If so, what version is it?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    A: I am not familiar with the textual issues in Job, so I am unable to answer your question adequately. Sorry\u2026<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    The question you ask below about the interlinear is complicated. Since there are so many LXX manuscripts available, each book has to be evaluated and reconstructed. Many of them are done, some are still incomplete.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Here is the main list:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    http:\/\/ccat.sas.upenn.edu\/ioscs\/editions.html<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

    The English Translation is based on the best LXX texts reconstructed thus far:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    http:\/\/ccat.sas.upenn.edu\/nets\/edition\/<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

    If you want to keep up with LXX news, you can follow this blog: https:\/\/williamaross.com\/<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

    I interview Dr. Ross here:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    \n