Isaiah 53 the origin of PSA

[civic]

Almost like you force me by you saying -"anyone who denies this-" So if I deny this I have an ulterior motive?

Are you denying that Paul quoted from the LXX ?

 

[Johann]

Are you denying that Paul quoted from the LXX ?

Short answer-

As regards quoting the Old Testament, Paul cites recurrently, but not always the Septuagint (or possibly another Greek translation). Sometimes he (or perhaps someone else before him) clearly translates his text directly from the Hebrew.

We can say that the NT use of Greek renditions of the Hebrew is proof that a faithful translation of the Word of God is still the Word of God.

Matthew's (for example) putting Jesus' quotation of the OT into a Greek form is no proof that Jesus was literally reading the LXX.

For one thing, the notion of a quality "standard" LXX before the advent of a printing press is absurd.

There couldn't possibly be any such thing; and so far as we know there wasn't anything like the Jewish concern for the precise preservation of the Hebrew text extended to any Greek translations. For all we know, a number of NT apostolic renderings of OT passages made it "back into" LXX variants.

Jesus most likely read the standard Hebrew text in the Judean and Galilean synagogues; though it is not beyond all possibility that he might have encountered a Greek translation during any time he spent trans-Jordan.

We only know how reliable any Greek translation is, or how the apostles may have treated some OT passage, because there's a Hebrew original to which we have access.

 

[civic]

Short answer-

As regards quoting the Old Testament, Paul cites recurrently, but not always the Septuagint (or possibly another Greek translation). Sometimes he (or perhaps someone else before him) clearly translates his text directly from the Hebrew.

We can say that the NT use of Greek renditions of the Hebrew is proof that a faithful translation of the Word of God is still the Word of God.

Matthew's (for example) putting Jesus' quotation of the OT into a Greek form is no proof that Jesus was literally reading the LXX.

For one thing, the notion of a quality "standard" LXX before the advent of a printing press is absurd.

There couldn't possibly be any such thing; and so far as we know there wasn't anything like the Jewish concern for the precise preservation of the Hebrew text extended to any Greek translations. For all we know, a number of NT apostolic renderings of OT passages made it "back into" LXX variants.

Jesus most likely read the standard Hebrew text in the Judean and Galilean synagogues; though it is not beyond all possibility that he might have encountered a Greek translation during any time he spent trans-Jordan.

We only know how reliable any Greek translation is, or how the apostles may have treated some OT passage, because there's a Hebrew original to which we have access.

Yes Paul used both it’s not one or the other.

 

[Johann]

Yes Paul used both it’s not one or the other.

In a nutshell, yes, I believe the NT authors quoted the LXX when it was faithful to the Hebrew Masoretic, but did not when it was not.

 

[civic]

In a nutshell, yes, I believe the NT authors quoted the LXX when it was faithful to the Hebrew Masoretic, but did not when it was not.

We are on the same page my friend.

 

[synergy]

Nothing-just thinking out loudly.

Isa 53:4 Surely he hath borne our griefs, and carried our sorrows: yet we did esteem him stricken, smitten of God, and afflicted.

Isa 53:4 This one [our sins bore], and on account of us he was grieved. And we considered him to be for misery, and for calamity by God, and for ill treatment.

Isa 53:4 He bears our sins, and is pained for us: yet we accounted him to be in trouble, and in suffering, and in affliction.

Isa 53:4 Surely he hath borne our sufferings, and nasah (carried [Vayikra 16:22; Yeshayah 53:12)] our sorrows; yet we did esteem him stricken, [i.e., like a leper is stricken] smitten of G-d, and afflicted [see verse 8 below].

אכן חלינו הוא נשׂא ומכאבינו סבלם ואנחנו חשׁבנהו נגוע מכה אלהים ומענה׃

Now-since we have no originals-which one is the correct verse?

Personally, I would stay away from the Masoretes who were not adverse to the ripping out of all the OT books that their Hellenized Jewish colleagues wrote in Greek.

What do those historical facts say about all the Protestant OT Bibles that based themselves on the Masoretic text? Lord have mercy.

 

[synergy]

Short answer-

As regards quoting the Old Testament, Paul cites recurrently, but not always the Septuagint (or possibly another Greek translation). Sometimes he (or perhaps someone else before him) clearly translates his text directly from the Hebrew.

We can say that the NT use of Greek renditions of the Hebrew is proof that a faithful translation of the Word of God is still the Word of God.

Matthew's (for example) putting Jesus' quotation of the OT into a Greek form is no proof that Jesus was literally reading the LXX.

For one thing, the notion of a quality "standard" LXX before the advent of a printing press is absurd.

There couldn't possibly be any such thing; and so far as we know there wasn't anything like the Jewish concern for the precise preservation of the Hebrew text extended to any Greek translations. For all we know, a number of NT apostolic renderings of OT passages made it "back into" LXX variants.

Jesus most likely read the standard Hebrew text in the Judean and Galilean synagogues; though it is not beyond all possibility that he might have encountered a Greek translation during any time he spent trans-Jordan.

We only know how reliable any Greek translation is, or how the apostles may have treated some OT passage, because there's a Hebrew original to which we have access.

Where is that "Hebrew original" that you're talking about?

 

[synergy]

In a nutshell, yes, I believe the NT authors quoted the LXX when it was faithful to the Hebrew Masoretic, but did not when it was not.

The Masoretic text did not exist at the time of the Apostles.

 

[Johann]

The Masoretic text did not exist at the time of the Apostles.

Guess you can't trust ANY Bible these days-yes?

 

[synergy]

Guess you can't trust ANY Bible these days-yes?

You have to be very discerning of the truth through alot of critical thinking based on good sources. The Hellenic Jews called the Bereans were excellent examples of that. I'm happy @civic named his forum after them.

 

[Johann]

You have to be very discerning of the truth through alot of critical thinking. The Hellenic Jews called the Bereans were excellent examples of that. I'm happy @civic named his forum after them.

So am I-guess we need to do a constant "critical thinking" as to which Bible? When we HAVE the Bible. I don't want to think too much-just dive in and accept the Scriptures as God's word. Yes?

Act 17:11 These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so.
More noble than those (eugenesteroi tōn). Comparative form of eugenēs, old and common adjective, but in N.T. only here and Luk_19:12; 1Co_1:26. Followed by ablative case tōn as often after the comparative.

With all readiness of mind (meta pāsēs prothumias). Old word from prothumos (pro, thumos) and means eagerness, rushing forward. In the N.T. only here and 2Co_8:11-19; 2Co_9:2. In Thessalonica many of the Jews out of pride and prejudice refused to listen. Here the Jews joyfully welcomed the two Jewish visitors.

Examining the Scriptures daily (kath' hēmeran anakrinontes tas graphas). Paul expounded the Scriptures daily as in Thessalonica, but the Beroeans, instead of resenting his new interpretation, examined (anakrinō means to sift up and down, make careful and exact research as in legal processes as in Act_4:9; Act_12:19, etc.) the Scriptures for themselves. In Scotland people have the Bible open on the preacher as he expounds the passage, a fine habit worth imitating.

Whether these things were so (ei echoi tauta houtōs). Literally, “if these things had it thus.” The present optative in the indirect question represents an original present indicative as in Luk_1:29 (Robertson, Grammar, pp. 1043f.). This use of ei with the optative may be looked at as the condition of the fourth class (undetermined with less likelihood of determination) as in Act_17:27; Act_20:16; Act_24:19; Act_27:12 (Robertson, Grammar, p. 1021).

The Beroeans were eagerly interested in the new message of Paul and Silas but they wanted to see it for themselves. What a noble attitude. Paul’s preaching made Bible students of them. The duty of private interpretation is thus made plain (Hovey).
RWP

What a noble attitude-the Beroeans

 

[Diserner]

I think people kind of misunderstand the whole Bereans thing as if we find truth through intellectual study.

It was their spiritual hunger that was being commended there.

 

[Johann]

I think people kind of misunderstand the whole Bereans thing as if we find truth through intellectual study.

It was their spiritual hunger that was being commended there.

With all readiness of mind (meta pāsēs prothumias). Old word from prothumos (pro, thumos) and means eagerness, rushing forward. In the N.T. only here and 2Co_8:11-19; 2Co_9:2. In Thessalonica many of the Jews out of pride and prejudice refused to listen. Here the Jews joyfully welcomed the two Jewish visitors.

I don't for one moment think the Bereans were eagerly searching the Scriptures with a intellectual mindset.

 

[Diserner]

I don't for one moment think the Bereans were eagerly searching the Scriptures with a intellectual mindset.

Yeah.

When I see someone like Rabbi Tovia thinking that Christians misconstrue the plain OT passages to make them Christianized, you'd have to think he would approve of the Bereans and think it would lead them back to Judaism.

Paul talks about that veil over the eyes.

I can't hardly read through Isaiah 53 without being moved to tears, but I know that would not be the case for Tovia.

 

[Johann]

Yeah.

When I see someone like Rabbi Tovia thinking that Christians misconstrue the plain OT passages to make them Christianized, you'd have to think he would approve of the Bereans and think it would lead them back to Judaism.

Paul talks about that veil over the eyes.

I can't hardly read through Isaiah 53 without being moved to tears, but I know that would not be the case for Tovia.

Pray for him brother-that the eyes of his understanding/heart may be enlightened/opened.
Isaiah 53 is precious, otherworldly and holy.
Shalom Achi.

 

[synergy]

I don't for one moment think the Bereans were eagerly searching the Scriptures with a intellectual mimindset.

The Bereans had an intelligent, open, and sharp spiritual mindset. One must be wise as serpents with critical thinking and harmless as doves. Spiritual situation awareness is a must.

 

[Johann]

The Bereans had an intelligent, open, and sharp mindset. One must be wise as serpents with critical thinking and harmless as doves. Situation awareness is a must.

I agree-which is your primary Bible?
I am more of an analytical thinker-probably because I am a left hander.

 

[synergy]

I agree-which is your primary Bible?
I am more of an analytical thinker-probably because I am a left hander.

I have a list of Bibles. I'll give you that list first chance I get. What is your list?

 

[The Rogue Tomato]

I agree-which is your primary Bible?
I am more of an analytical thinker-probably because I am a left hander.

Being left-handed means the right side of your brain is dominant. That's the creative side, not the analytical thinking side.

EDITED TO ADD: That doesn't mean you're not a critical thinker. It's just not because you're left-handed.

 

[Johann]

I have a list of Bibles. I'll give you that list first chance I get. What is your list?

I have a bunch of Bibles-but it's late here in South Africa brother-will give you my list tomorrow-God willing.
J.