Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: Uncle Chip
The fact that 2 BC COPIES of the Greek septuagint AND Hebrew texts with the same wording IN HEBREW have been discovered at Qumran. Protestant denominations lie about this to defend an uninformed opinion from the 14th century. Well show me the evidence --- where can I find this --- is there a link ????? Is it the entire OT or just a few books???? And which LXX do they match up with --- that of Lucian or that of Origen or neither????

By copies, he means fragments and ofcourse there is disagreement over the meaning of those fragments by the scholars themselves.

Paul Kahle (a famous OT scholar) who has done extensive work in the Septuagint does not believe that there was one original old Greek version and that consequently the manuscripts of the Septuagint (so-called) cannot be traced back to one archetype. The theory, proposed and developed largely by him, is that the LXX had its origin in numerous oral, and subsequently written translations for use in the services after the reading of the Hebrew original. Later an official standardized version of the Law was made, but did not entirely replace the older versions, while for the rest of the books there never was a standard Jewish translation, but only a variety of versions (Gooding).

G. R. Driver (1965) disagrees with the interpretation which Albright, Burrows, Cross and other scholars have placed upon the Dead Sea Scrolls. Denying that these documents date from pre-Christian times, he relates them instead to the Jewish Revolt against Rome in AD 66 - 73, thus making them roughly contemporary with the New Testament. He believes that the Righteous Teacher mentioned in the Scrolls was Manaemus (Menahem), a leader in the Revolt and perhaps a son of the rebel Judas mentioned in Acts 5:37. Hence, in Driver's opinion, the Dead Sea Scrolls were written in the first and early second centuries AD, a theory which, if true, greatly alters the significance of these Scrolls both for history and for textual criticism.

Thus we see that, despite the new discoveries, our confidence in the trustworthiness of the Old Testament text must rest on some more solid foundation than the opinions of naturalistic scholars. For as the current Qumran studies demonstrate, these scholars disagree with one another. What one scholar grants another takes away. Instead of depending on such inconstant allies, Bible-believing Christians should develop their own type of Old Testament textual criticism, a textual criticism which takes its stand on the promises of Christ and views the evidence in the light of these promises.

http://www.biblebelievers.net/BibleVersions/kjcforv2.htm#X

10,966 posted on 02/21/2007 1:04:36 PM PST by fortheDeclaration (For what saith the scripture? (Rom.4:3))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10948 | View Replies ]


To: All

Anyone interested you can listen to Catholic Radio (sirius radio station) free for three days, at this web site. Go to free on-line trial.
http://www.sirius.com/servlet/ContentServer?pagename=Sirius/CachedPage&c=Channel&cid=1158082409509


10,967 posted on 02/21/2007 1:06:58 PM PST by mware (By all that you hold dear.. on this good earth... I bid you stand! Men of the West!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10966 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson