Replies

There is no historical evidence of any BC work existing-period

There are koine Greek fragments going back to the second century BC of Leviticus and Deuteronomy (Rahlfs numbers 801, 819, and 957), and the first century BC fragments including Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy, and the Minor Prophets (Rahlfs numbers 802, 803, 805, 848, 942, and 943).

Besides, there are no OT fragments of any kind older than 500 BC. Does that mean ther was no OT before that? If we are to follow marginal Prostestant biblical thinkers, such as Paul Kahle, there wasn't!

There is no historical evidence of any BC work existing-period There are koine Greek fragments going back to the second century BC of Leviticus and Deuteronomy (Rahlfs numbers 801, 819, and 957), and the first century BC fragments including Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy, and the Minor Prophets (Rahlfs numbers 802, 803, 805, 848, 942, and 943).

So, finally you agree that there is nothing older then some 2nd century fragments of the Torah.

The minor prophets are not BC (nice try).

No, because there is other historical evidence of a Hebrew Bible, as it being quoted by Christ and the Apostles.

The careful copying of Jewish scribes is proven by how close the copy of Isaiah found in the Dead Sea Scrolls (1st century AD) matches that of the MT (10th century)

There were probably individual Greek translations of some of the Hebrew Books, but there was no single translation that we know today as the Septuagint.

As for Kahe being a 'marginal Protestant', nice attempt at 'poisoning the well'

Is being a 'marginal Protestant' anything like being a 'marginal Christian' like the Orthodox are?