What would prompt you to throw this into the soup?
You (collectively) speak of the LEGEND of the LXX as if it were fact while, in actuality, the Septuagint is composed of various scraps dating from the 4th century.
Yes, there is a Septuagint today and, yes, it is a compilation of several, and varying, scrolls.
A short article on the Greek Septuagint follows:
“”You (collectively) speak of the LEGEND of the LXX as if it were fact.””
Not really,I know enough that we can’t claim anything as fact regarding practically ANYTHING about ORIGINAL Scripture. The best source we have is the Catholic Church for most History on NT and for Christian history as a whole,like it or not.
I believe the Bible is the word of God because the Church says it is . It’s a matter of faith,OR
There are enough 2nd century NT manuscripts quoting from the Old Testament that differ significantly from the Hebrew (Masoretic) text. Whether these quotes represent Christian corruption of the Old Testament or a canon of an alternate version of the Jewish scripture is debatable.
The existence of Essene's Qumran documents indicate that the Palestinian (Pharisaical) version of the Old Testament was not the only one, so the existence of alternative versions is not without foundation.
On the other hand, New Testament books such as the Book of Hebrews (for example chapter 8 comes to mind) shows that Christian authors did not shrink from adding their own text to Old Testament verses in order to "harmonize" them with the emerging new theology.