I've known Square Hebrews, and I've known Jivin' Hebrews.
Butt seriously, as the Pamploma bull said...
There are two discussions going on here. The one we see in this thread is among the scholars and students, concerning which texts are the most reliable and why, of which there is a fair amount of understandable controversy.
The other, which is as significant in my own thinking, is the discussion between believers and skeptics. Skeptics love nothing better than to listen to the arguments among the "Bible people" about the Masoretic texts, and the Square Hebrew texts, and the Septuagint translation, and the Peshitta translation, and does the KJV capture the truth of history and prophecy, and does alma really mean virgin, and so on and so on and scooby dooby dooby...
Cause all it does is justify in their minds the unreliability of Scripture as an historical text, a prophetic text, and a divinely-inspired text. And our God-given commission is to bring as many everyday people to Christ as possible (whether "possible" means determinist or free will is irrelevant here), to get them past their skepticism to belief and confession (Romans 10:9), to get them heaven- rather than hellbound.
So how do we get past the scholarly controversies without discounting them, but recognizing that practically any of the above texts can bring people to Christ because it is the living Spirit that draws the unbeliever through the living Word?
St. Paul said divisions would come to ferret out the true from the false.
There were divisions during (proto Gnostics versus the Apostles, etc) and even after the the Apostolic Age and even worse Gnostics then. Then the Arians, etc.
Alas, if the Pharisees, Sadducees, the Tannaim, and Masoretes after them would have just done the right thing and accepted Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior this would be a moot point. And if the Masoretes hadn’t been heretics and did their own thing creating corrupt texts, again this would be a moot point.
The skeptics? They’ve been around a long time. They argued well over a century ago the Hittites historical existence was fantasy, thus the story of the Hittites being in the land when Abraham came in was false, thus the story of Abraham also was false.
When archaeological discoveries proved the existence of the Hittites in the Levant, both in and outside of Palestine, they, like skeptics today, refuse to believe and repent and mive on to ongoing unbelief. Jesus raised the dead and they in His time refused to believe.
Well for the truly skeptical in the sense that they are careful and reserved about jumping to conclusions, we have no worries. Such a person has a good idea of when they only have a superficial knowledge of something and resist going off on tangents with half baked understandings.
For those who simply see religion in particular as something that is not to be taken seriously, then I think it is foolish to take their evaluation seriously. Rather we should just be real with each other, and not patronize them by second guessing what they are thinking about what we say. Nobody likes to feel like they are being "sold" something. People instinctively trust people that are just being straight up over people that seem to be second guessing how others will take what they say.
Makes ya wonder which ‘version’ of the Isaiahan scroll the eunuch was reading when Philip came by.
I think you have summarized my thoughts fairly well. I am inclined to believe that we have the Scriptures that the Holy Spirit wishes us to have. I have studied the MT in great depth - and so find deep Spiritual revelations there. I have cross referenced those discoveries to the Septuagint and found those revelations lacking.
A couple of points 'All Over' sped by. The Masoretes did not do their work in a few years or even in the span of a single lifetime. They had received corrupted and error ridden texts from centuries of copying and they prayed for guidance to cleanse them and try to restore them to God's original intent. Contrary to the poster's position that there are deep differences with the DSS, I have seen many commentators remark on the marvelous compatibility of the two texts.
Another point; all the alternate texts mentioned by 'All Over' are readily available on the www - a marvel in itself. The Bible student is free to read and evaluate all available texts, even the Gnostic Nag Hammadi distractions.
In all spiritual studies the student needs greatly to ask for the guidance of the Holy Spirit. 😇