Is the Background of God's Word Greek or Jewish?

[synergy]

Yes. He texted me! Lol
Again you are missing my point. Easter is celebrated on a Greek pagan holiday much like Christmas. Why is that? You really think Yeshua was born on December 25th? Only a person lacking sufficient brain cells would believe that.
The Masoretic text is much superior than the septuagint translation version which was copied from the Hebrew manuscripts.

The superiority of the Septuagint (LXX) over the medieval Masoretic Text (MT) is demonstrated in many ways:

1. the Dead Sea Scrolls decisively show that the MT contains manipulations such as when the DSS Hebrew manuscripts agree with the LXX against the MT (e.g. Deut 32:8 “sons of God” rather than MT’s “sons of Israel” and many others...), proving that MT readings were manipulated, as Justin Martyr also claimed and proved

2. the LXX is based on Hebrew Vorlagen circulating in the 3rd–2nd centuries BC, over a millennium earlier than the fully vocalized MT tradition finalized by the Masoretes (9th–10th century AD), making the LXX an indispensable witness to pre-rabbinic textual forms.

3. the LXX preserves older readings later suppressed or smoothed by non-believing Jews in the MT for theological or polemical reasons (especially messianic and divine plurality texts), a fact acknowledged even by critical Jewish scholarship.

4. the LXX was the Bible of Second Temple Judaism outside Judea, the Scriptures of the early Church, and the LXX textual base was overwhelmingly quoted in the New Testament—meaning that Apostolic Theology itself presupposes the authority of the LXX over the MT.

Taken together, manuscript evidence, textual criticism, historical priority, and apostolic usage all converge to show that the Septuagint preserves a more ancient and authentic form of the Hebrew Scriptures than the manipulated Masoretic Text.

Anytime you make a copy from the original the copy is inferior in some way or manner. My opinion. No Jew recognizes or uses the Septuagint translation. That is fact.
Shalom

Non-believing Jews do not recognize nor use the Septuagint because that would make them Christians. God forbid that should ever happen.

 

[koverbd]

Really?
Examples of "Missing" Verses in the LXX (Compared to Modern Bibles)

• Jeremiah 33:14-26: This section, known as the "true branch" prophecy, is absent in the Septuagint version of Jeremiah, suggesting it might be a later addition to the Hebrew text.
• Proverbs 22:6: Omitted in the LXX, this verse is believed to have not been present in the older Hebrew source text used for the translation.
• Esther: Catholic and Orthodox Bibles include about 100 verses in Esther that are found in the Septuagint but not the Hebrew Bible, adding prayers and context.
• New Testament (Acts 8:37, John 5:4): Verses found in some later Greek texts (like the Textus Receptus, basis for KJV) are missing in earlier Greek manuscripts and the LXX, often appearing in footnotes in modern translations.
• Why These Differences Exist
  • Different Source Texts: The LXX translators worked from Hebrew manuscripts that differed from the standardized Hebrew Masoretic Text (MT) developed later.
  • Textual Families: There wasn't a single "original" Bible text, but multiple textual traditions (Vorlage) that developed.
  • Scribal Practices: Omissions or additions could occur during copying, but often reflect the textual source rather than errors.
  • Literary/Theological Reasons: Some omissions, like the "n" verse in Psalm 145 (present in the LXX but missing from MT), might be intentional for literary effect. The Septuagint (LXX) contains several notable "minuses"—verses or passages found in the standard Hebrew Masoretic Text (MT) but absent from the ancient Greek translation. In some cases, scholars believe the LXX preserves an older, shorter version of the text, while in others, verses may have been lost during translation or manuscript transmission.
  • The Septuagint (LXX) contains several notable "minuses"—verses or passages found in the standard Hebrew Masoretic Text (MT) but absent from the ancient Greek translation. In some cases, scholars believe the LXX preserves an older, shorter version of the text, while in others, verses may have been lost during translation or manuscript transmission.
  • Notable Missing Verses and Passages
    • Jeremiah 33:14–26: This significant prophecy about the "Righteous Branch" and the Davidic covenant is entirely missing from the Septuagint.
    • 1 Samuel 17:12–31 and 55–18:5: Large sections of the David and Goliath narrative, including David's conversation with his brothers and Saul's inquiry about David's lineage, are absent in the oldest LXX manuscripts like Codex Vaticanus.
    • Exodus 36:10–33: The Septuagint skips a large portion of the description of the Tabernacle's construction that is found in the Hebrew text.
    • Isaiah 2:22: This verse ("Stop trusting in mere humans...") is missing from the LXX but present in both the Masoretic Text and the Dead Sea Scrolls.
    • Proverbs 22:6: The famous verse "Train up a child in the way he should go..." is omitted in the Septuagint.
    • Job: The Septuagint version of Job is approximately one-sixth shorter than the Hebrew version, missing numerous verses throughout the book.
  • 
    Context of Textual Differences
    The relationship between the Septuagint and the Hebrew Bible is complex, and "missing" can be a relative term depending on which text is considered the original:
    • Older Vorlage: Many scholars argue the LXX was translated from an earlier Hebrew "Vorlage" (source text) that was shorter than the version later standardized by the Masoretes.
    • Psalm 145:13: In this case, the LXX actually contains a verse (the "Nun" verse) that is missing from the Masoretic Text. The Dead Sea Scrolls later confirmed this verse existed in ancient Hebrew, showing the LXX can also preserve what the MT lost.
    • Order and Length: Books like Jeremiah and Proverbs not only have different lengths but also arrange their chapters in a significantly different order than modern Bibles.
  • 
    
  • For detailed verse-by-verse comparisons, academic resources like the New English Translation of the Septuagint (NETS) provide a clear view of these structural differences.
    
    
    Impact on Christian Doctrine
    For most Christian traditions, these differences are seen as variations in the transmission of a unified divine message rather than a conflict of core truths.
    
    • Essential Truths: Central doctrines such as creation, the fall, the incarnation, resurrection, and justification by faith are supported by both traditions and do not rely on single variant readings.
    • Christological Interpretation: The LXX is foundational for Eastern Orthodox theology, as it provides the specific vocabulary used by New Testament writers to identify Jesus as the Messiah (e.g., "virgin" in Isaiah 7:14).
    • Canonical Scope: A major difference is the inclusion of the Deuterocanon/Apocrypha in the LXX. These books are part of the Catholic and Orthodox canons but were excluded from Protestant Bibles because they were not found in the Hebrew MT.
    
    Impact on Jewish Doctrine
    In Judaism, the Masoretic Text
    is the definitive authority, and the differences in the LXX are largely viewed as a matter of translation history rather than doctrinal change.
    
    • Textual Precision: Rabbinic Judaism emphasizes the precise preservation of the Hebrew text. The LXX was eventually distanced from Jewish tradition, partly because of its adoption by Christians for polemical arguments regarding Jesus.
    • Language of Revelation: Judaism holds that the original Hebrew conveys nuances—such as the Divine Name (Tetragrammaton)—that are lost or altered when replaced by Greek titles like Kyrios (Lord).
    • Halakha (Law): Jewish legal interpretation is derived specifically from the Hebrew MT; therefore, LXX variations in legal portions (like Exodus or Leviticus) do not affect Jewish law.

B'shem Yeshua
Shalom

 

[synergy]

Really?
Examples of "Missing" Verses in the LXX (Compared to Modern Bibles)

• Jeremiah 33:14-26: This section, known as the "true branch" prophecy, is absent in the Septuagint version of Jeremiah, suggesting it might be a later addition to the Hebrew text.
• Proverbs 22:6: Omitted in the LXX, this verse is believed to have not been present in the older Hebrew source text used for the translation.
• Esther: Catholic and Orthodox Bibles include about 100 verses in Esther that are found in the Septuagint but not the Hebrew Bible, adding prayers and context.
• New Testament (Acts 8:37, John 5:4): Verses found in some later Greek texts (like the Textus Receptus, basis for KJV) are missing in earlier Greek manuscripts and the LXX, often appearing in footnotes in modern translations.
• Why These Differences Exist
  • Different Source Texts: The LXX translators worked from Hebrew manuscripts that differed from the standardized Hebrew Masoretic Text (MT) developed later.
  • Textual Families: There wasn't a single "original" Bible text, but multiple textual traditions (Vorlage) that developed.
  • Scribal Practices: Omissions or additions could occur during copying, but often reflect the textual source rather than errors.
  • Literary/Theological Reasons: Some omissions, like the "n" verse in Psalm 145 (present in the LXX but missing from MT), might be intentional for literary effect. The Septuagint (LXX) contains several notable "minuses"—verses or passages found in the standard Hebrew Masoretic Text (MT) but absent from the ancient Greek translation. In some cases, scholars believe the LXX preserves an older, shorter version of the text, while in others, verses may have been lost during translation or manuscript transmission.
  • The Septuagint (LXX) contains several notable "minuses"—verses or passages found in the standard Hebrew Masoretic Text (MT) but absent from the ancient Greek translation. In some cases, scholars believe the LXX preserves an older, shorter version of the text, while in others, verses may have been lost during translation or manuscript transmission.
  • Notable Missing Verses and Passages
    • Jeremiah 33:14–26: This significant prophecy about the "Righteous Branch" and the Davidic covenant is entirely missing from the Septuagint.
    • 1 Samuel 17:12–31 and 55–18:5: Large sections of the David and Goliath narrative, including David's conversation with his brothers and Saul's inquiry about David's lineage, are absent in the oldest LXX manuscripts like Codex Vaticanus.
    • Exodus 36:10–33: The Septuagint skips a large portion of the description of the Tabernacle's construction that is found in the Hebrew text.
    • Isaiah 2:22: This verse ("Stop trusting in mere humans...") is missing from the LXX but present in both the Masoretic Text and the Dead Sea Scrolls.
    • Proverbs 22:6: The famous verse "Train up a child in the way he should go..." is omitted in the Septuagint.
    • Job: The Septuagint version of Job is approximately one-sixth shorter than the Hebrew version, missing numerous verses throughout the book.
  • 
    Context of Textual Differences
    The relationship between the Septuagint and the Hebrew Bible is complex, and "missing" can be a relative term depending on which text is considered the original:
    • Older Vorlage: Many scholars argue the LXX was translated from an earlier Hebrew "Vorlage" (source text) that was shorter than the version later standardized by the Masoretes.
    • Psalm 145:13: In this case, the LXX actually contains a verse (the "Nun" verse) that is missing from the Masoretic Text. The Dead Sea Scrolls later confirmed this verse existed in ancient Hebrew, showing the LXX can also preserve what the MT lost.
    • Order and Length: Books like Jeremiah and Proverbs not only have different lengths but also arrange their chapters in a significantly different order than modern Bibles.
  • 
    
  • For detailed verse-by-verse comparisons, academic resources like the New English Translation of the Septuagint (NETS) provide a clear view of these structural differences.
    
    
    Impact on Christian Doctrine
    For most Christian traditions, these differences are seen as variations in the transmission of a unified divine message rather than a conflict of core truths.
    
    • Essential Truths: Central doctrines such as creation, the fall, the incarnation, resurrection, and justification by faith are supported by both traditions and do not rely on single variant readings.
    • Christological Interpretation: The LXX is foundational for Eastern Orthodox theology, as it provides the specific vocabulary used by New Testament writers to identify Jesus as the Messiah (e.g., "virgin" in Isaiah 7:14).
    • Canonical Scope: A major difference is the inclusion of the Deuterocanon/Apocrypha in the LXX. These books are part of the Catholic and Orthodox canons but were excluded from Protestant Bibles because they were not found in the Hebrew MT.
    
    Impact on Jewish Doctrine
    In Judaism, the Masoretic Text
    is the definitive authority, and the differences in the LXX are largely viewed as a matter of translation history rather than doctrinal change.
    
    • Textual Precision: Rabbinic Judaism emphasizes the precise preservation of the Hebrew text. The LXX was eventually distanced from Jewish tradition, partly because of its adoption by Christians for polemical arguments regarding Jesus.
    • Language of Revelation: Judaism holds that the original Hebrew conveys nuances—such as the Divine Name (Tetragrammaton)—that are lost or altered when replaced by Greek titles like Kyrios (Lord).
    • Halakha (Law): Jewish legal interpretation is derived specifically from the Hebrew MT; therefore, LXX variations in legal portions (like Exodus or Leviticus) do not affect Jewish law.

B'shem Yeshua
Shalom

Let's look at your essential Judaizing flaw which is your attempt to subjugate Greek Apostolic Christian theology under Judaizing Jewish authority by raising ethnic and rabbinic frameworks over Apostolic Revelation, thereby reversing the very trajectory of the New Testament itself. While you correctly note textual plurality, you nevertheless weaponize that fact to undermine the Church’s Christological reading of Scripture, as if Greek were an alien intrusion rather than the providential vehicle through which God made His Word universally intelligible (Acts 2; Gal. 3:28). The New Testament writers—Jews themselves—did not merely borrow the Septuagint; they theologically endorsed and authorized it by using its very words to reveal Christ as the Uncreated Word of God (John 1:1; Phil. 2:6–11; Heb. 1). By you elevating your medieval and manipulated Masoretic tradition as the corrective norm, your rant effectively subjects the gospel to a Judaism that rejects the Word of God who was God, was with God, and who tabernacled on Earth as Jesus. You're re-inscribing the very error Paul condemns which is to return to the guardianship of the Law after the fullness has come (Gal. 4:1–11). This is not fidelity to Jewish roots but a denial that the promises to Israel reach their telos in Christ (our Lord and our God) and were proclaimed authoritatively by the Apostles to the nations, apart from your ethnic gatekeeping (Rom. 10:4; Eph. 2:14–17).

 

[koverbd]

Let's look at your essential Judaizing flaw which is your attempt to subjugate Greek Apostolic Christian theology under Judaizing Jewish authority by raising ethnic and rabbinic frameworks over Apostolic Revelation, thereby reversing the very trajectory of the New Testament itself. While you correctly note textual plurality, you nevertheless weaponize that fact to undermine the Church’s Christological reading of Scripture, as if Greek were an alien intrusion rather than the providential vehicle through which God made His Word universally intelligible (Acts 2; Gal. 3:28). The New Testament writers—Jews themselves—did not merely borrow the Septuagint; they theologically endorsed and authorized it by using its very words to reveal Christ as the Uncreated Word of God (John 1:1; Phil. 2:6–11; Heb. 1). By you elevating your medieval and manipulated Masoretic tradition as the corrective norm, your rant effectively subjects the gospel to a Judaism that rejects the Word of God who was God, was with God, and who tabernacled on Earth as Jesus. You're re-inscribing the very error Paul condemns which is to return to the guardianship of the Law after the fullness has come (Gal. 4:1–11). This is not fidelity to Jewish roots but a denial that the promises to Israel reach their telos in Christ (our Lord and our God) and were proclaimed authoritatively by the Apostles to the nations, apart from your ethnic gatekeeping (Rom. 10:4; Eph. 2:14–17).

Your false narratives are so overwhelming.
Greek is a language tool nothing more and nothing less. The Bible is a Jewish book not a Greek book. Judaism has never endorsed the Greek or Septuagint translation of the Hebrew Scriptures.
Shalom

 

[koverbd]

We must ALL see the same Jesus. We must ALL say the same thing as God. to do otherwise is to oppose Him.
Are you chastising me for bringing the Scripture to her error? That is all I can do for I am not the Holy Spirit. I cannot change 'hearts' and minds. All I do is plant and water. God gives the increase.
Shall I allow error to go without application of Scripture which is given by inspiration of God and is profitable for doctrine, reproof, correction, and instruction in righteousness, so that the man - and woman - of God may be throughly furnished unto all good works?

Did Jesus allow error to exist? Did Jesus overlook false theologies from wolves, and swine? The Holy Spirit does not use lies and errors to grow a true child of God. He uses truth. I make comment and I post Scripture that upholds my comments and my comments uphold Scripture. Do I walk away with the false philosophy that we "must agree to disagree" and allow the error to remain? When I see or read or hear someone say a wrong thing about the One True God I speak up. I make comment and bring the appropriate Scripture to one's error and I am able to sleep at night with a clean and clear conscience that I have done the Lord's work, I have served my Lord, and He is pleased with the outcome. True born Christians elevate the Word of God in their lives and are responsible for understanding the truth found in Scripture. If they refuse to understand or to accept what is written against their error then there lies the possibility the person and I do not have the same Father for I am always careful to call only true brethren my brethren and we do indeed share the same Father. I am called to test the spirits, to judge between good and evil, and between true and false. These are the ministries of all God's people who have been born-again by His Spirit. When one constantly rejects the Word of God in order to hold to their false doctrine then the possibility of a seared or defiled conscience is what might be evidenced. Jesus didn't mince words. As God He said what He means and He means what He says. As for others who may not be committed to truth of the Word of God is upon their own heads. What I may say may not even be for her. Many others are reading these comments and posts and the Scripture that accompanies these posts. There are only three choices in which we are responsible. We are to shoot the wolves, rebuke the swine, and feed the sheep. Would you chastise Jesus who told the religious in Israel, "Ye do err and know not the Scripture."
Have I done anything amiss then let those who may claim offense speak for themselves. But to be offended on account of another is unbiblical. We all stand or fall to our Master and do not need anyone to advocate for us in such matters. We are responsible to things that are true and also to things that are not. And if someone wants to know something they can merely ask. I am always ready to give an answer to those that ask of the hope in me.
And if they do not want to know they can always say nothing.

I'm criticizing you for your unfounded personal attacks on her. Are you a Jew masquerading as a Gentile fundamentalist Christian? You need to keep your personal snarky remarks to yourself, or you maybe put on ignore.
Shalom

 

[synergy]

Your false narratives are so overwhelming.
Greek is a language tool nothing more and nothing less. The Bible is a Jewish book not a Greek book. Judaism has never endorsed the Greek or Septuagint translation of the Hebrew Scriptures.
Shalom

It's non-believing Jews who have "never endorsed the Greek or Septuagint translation of the Hebrew Scriptures". The Apostles have clearly endorsed the LXX by directly quoting from it. May you and your non-believing Jewish comrades be happy with each other.

 

[koverbd]

It's non-believing Jews who have "never endorsed the Greek or Septuagint translation of the Hebrew Scriptures". The Apostles have clearly endorsed the LXX by directly quoting from it. May you and your non-believing Jewish comrades be happy with each other.

Again not true. The Messianic Apostles were using the Masoretic including the Messianic Jews today. My you and your pagan Greek friends enjoy your day and have a ham sandwich !

The Messianic Apostles (early followers of Jesus) and the Masoretic Text (the authoritative Hebrew Bible tradition) intersect in discussions about prophecy, especially regarding Jesus as the Messiah, with debates over interpretations where the Masoretic Text (MT) seems different from older Greek translations (Septuagint/LXX) or contains features interpreted as obscuring messianic passages, while other MT verses (like Isaiah 9:6) are seen as explicitly messianic. The Masoretes were medieval Jewish scribes who meticulously preserved the Hebrew Bible, adding vowels and accents, forming the basis for most Bible translations, but some Christian interpretations suggest subtle changes were made to downplay messianic fulfillment, though many other passages clearly point to Jesus, say scholars like Michael Rydelnik.
Key Concepts

• Masoretic Text (MT): The standard Hebrew text of the Tanakh (Old Testament) preserved by Jewish scribes (Masoretes) from the 5th to 10th centuries CE, adding vowel points and marginal notes (Masorah).
• Messianic Apostles: Refers to figures like Paul and Peter, who interpreted Hebrew Scriptures as prophecies of Jesus, citing passages like Psalm 16:10 as messianic.
• Septuagint (LXX): An earlier Greek translation of the Hebrew Bible, sometimes differing from the MT, as seen in Isaiah 7:14 (virgin vs. maiden).

Points of Discussion

1. Interpretational Differences:
   • Some scholars argue that rabbinic interpretation within the MT subtly obscured messianic prophecies found in older traditions (like the LXX).
   • Examples cited include Isaiah 7:14 (almah/maiden vs. parthenos/virgin) and differences in Isaiah 53.
2. Explicitly Messianic Passages in MT:
   • Despite arguments for alteration, many MT passages are seen as strongly messianic, such as Isaiah 9:6 ("Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace").
3. Accuracy of Transmission:
   • The Masoretes' work was incredibly precise in preserving the text, but some scholars note earlier corruptions existed.
   • The Masoretic Text remains the foundation for most modern Bible translations, including King James Version (KJV) and New International Version (NIV).
4. New Testament Usage:
   • Apostles like Paul and Peter used Hebrew Scriptures to prove Jesus was the Messiah, showing how these texts were understood messianically in the early church.

In essence, the term connects the textual tradition of Judaism (Masoretic Text) with the Christian interpretation of prophecy (Messianic Apostles), highlighting both continuity and points of theological debate over specific passages.
Shalom

 

[synergy]

Again not true. The Messianic Apostles were using the Masoretic including the Messianic Jews today. My you and your pagan Greek friends enjoy your day and have a ham sandwich !

The Messianic Apostles (early followers of Jesus) and the Masoretic Text (the authoritative Hebrew Bible tradition) intersect in discussions about prophecy, especially regarding Jesus as the Messiah, with debates over interpretations where the Masoretic Text (MT) seems different from older Greek translations (Septuagint/LXX) or contains features interpreted as obscuring messianic passages, while other MT verses (like Isaiah 9:6) are seen as explicitly messianic. The Masoretes were medieval Jewish scribes who meticulously preserved the Hebrew Bible, adding vowels and accents, forming the basis for most Bible translations, but some Christian interpretations suggest subtle changes were made to downplay messianic fulfillment, though many other passages clearly point to Jesus, say scholars like Michael Rydelnik.
Key Concepts

• Masoretic Text (MT): The standard Hebrew text of the Tanakh (Old Testament) preserved by Jewish scribes (Masoretes) from the 5th to 10th centuries CE, adding vowel points and marginal notes (Masorah).
• Messianic Apostles: Refers to figures like Paul and Peter, who interpreted Hebrew Scriptures as prophecies of Jesus, citing passages like Psalm 16:10 as messianic.
• Septuagint (LXX): An earlier Greek translation of the Hebrew Bible, sometimes differing from the MT, as seen in Isaiah 7:14 (virgin vs. maiden).

Points of Discussion

1. Interpretational Differences:
   • Some scholars argue that rabbinic interpretation within the MT subtly obscured messianic prophecies found in older traditions (like the LXX).
   • Examples cited include Isaiah 7:14 (almah/maiden vs. parthenos/virgin) and differences in Isaiah 53.
2. Explicitly Messianic Passages in MT:
   • Despite arguments for alteration, many MT passages are seen as strongly messianic, such as Isaiah 9:6 ("Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace").
3. Accuracy of Transmission:
   • The Masoretes' work was incredibly precise in preserving the text, but some scholars note earlier corruptions existed.
   • The Masoretic Text remains the foundation for most modern Bible translations, including King James Version (KJV) and New International Version (NIV).
4. New Testament Usage:
   • Apostles like Paul and Peter used Hebrew Scriptures to prove Jesus was the Messiah, showing how these texts were understood messianically in the early church.

In essence, the term connects the textual tradition of Judaism (Masoretic Text) with the Christian interpretation of prophecy (Messianic Apostles), highlighting both continuity and points of theological debate over specific passages.
Shalom

Your timelines are all warped. The Apostles lived and wrote in the first century (c. AD 30–70), while the Masoretic Text is a medieval textual tradition finalized between the 7th and 10th centuries AD. That is a separation of over 700 years. To claim that “the Messianic Apostles were using the Masoretic” is therefore not merely incorrect—it is chronologically impossible. The Masoretes did not yet exist during the Apostolic age. They did not have time machines. Their vowel pointing, cantillation marks, and standardized consonantal decisions had not been developed. You cannot use a text tradition that will not exist for another 700 years!

What the Apostles demonstrably did use were:
1. Hebrew Scriptures without Masoretic vowelization,
2. Aramaic traditions, and most decisively,
3. The Septuagint (LXX)—the Greek Jewish translation of the Hebrew Scriptures produced centuries before Christ and widely used throughout the Jewish diaspora.

Heres another product of your timeline warping. Your insinuation that Christians invented objections to the MT out of “pagan Greek bias,” this ignores the fact that the Septuagint was a Jewish translation, produced by Jews, for Jews, centuries before Christianity existed. The Apostles were not borrowing from pagans; they were using the Scriptures already read in synagogues across the Greek-speaking Jewish world. Calling this “pagan” is historically warped and illiterate.

Finally, citing scholars like Michael Rydelnik does not rescue your timeline warped argument. One can affirm that some MT passages are original (Isaiah 9:6 included) without pretending that the Apostles had a time machine and used the medieval text. That point does nothing to fix the chronological error at the heart of your claim.

 

[koverbd]

Your timelines are all warped. The Apostles lived and wrote in the first century (c. AD 30–70), while the Masoretic Text is a medieval textual tradition finalized between the 7th and 10th centuries AD. That is a separation of over 700 years. To claim that “the Messianic Apostles were using the Masoretic” is therefore not merely incorrect—it is chronologically impossible. The Masoretes did not yet exist during the Apostolic age. They did not have time machines. Their vowel pointing, cantillation marks, and standardized consonantal decisions had not been developed. You cannot use a text tradition that will not exist for another 700 years!

What the Apostles demonstrably did use were:
1. Hebrew Scriptures without Masoretic vowelization,
2. Aramaic traditions, and most decisively,
3. The Septuagint (LXX)—the Greek Jewish translation of the Hebrew Scriptures produced centuries before Christ and widely used throughout the Jewish diaspora.

Heres another product of your timeline warping. Your insinuation that Christians invented objections to the MT out of “pagan Greek bias,” this ignores the fact that the Septuagint was a Jewish translation, produced by Jews, for Jews, centuries before Christianity existed. The Apostles were not borrowing from pagans; they were using the Scriptures already read in synagogues across the Greek-speaking Jewish world. Calling this “pagan” is historically warped and illiterate.

Finally, citing scholars like Michael Rydelnik does not rescue your timeline warped argument. One can affirm that some MT passages are original (Isaiah 9:6 included) without pretending that the Apostles had a time machine and used the medieval text. That point does nothing to fix the chronological error at the heart of your claim.

Again not true. Please finish your ham sandwich.