[John Leland 1789]

"Philo, Josephus, the Talmud, Origen"

All corrupt and questionable sources.

"Christ himself quoted from it."

No, it might have used material from NT sources that make it appear the other way around. Still no proof of a BC Sept.

[vladimir998]

6. Minor Prophets in Greek
8HevXIIgr
Scroll type: Biblical text
Date: 1st century BCE
Language: Greek
Discovered: “Cave of Horror” in Nahal Hever, 1952-1962
Habakkuk 1:11-Zephaniah 3:7

The presence of Greek biblical texts among the Dead Sea Scrolls illustrates that many Jews of this time could speak and read Greek, rather than or in addition to Hebrew. During the last four centuries of the Second Temple Period (536 BCE-70 CE), the Greeks and then the Romans conquered the land of ancient Israel and Judah, and many Jews also dispersed throughout the Middle East under Greek influence.

Although the scroll text appears in Greek, this translation follows the Hebrew original, rather than the widely-used Greek translation from 300-200 BCE called the Septuagint. The so-called “minor prophets” appear as 12 individual books in the Greek Septuagint and in the Christian Old Testament, but as a single volume in the Hebrew Bible. Dead Sea Scroll fragments contain prophetic writings of Jonah, Nahum, Micah, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, and Zechariah.

From the San Diego Natural History Museum website.

[aruanan]

No, it might have used material from NT sources that make it appear the other way around. Still no proof of a BC Sept.

Let's put it this way: there are far more ancient sources that support an LXX written between the 3rd and 1st century BC than you have to support your claim that it wasn't (as well as the fact that it was the commonly used OT amongst Jews of the first half of the first century). All you have done is offer conjecture, hand-waving ("it might have used material from NT sources that make it appear the other away around"), and impugning of sources ("all corrupt and questionable sources").

[cizinec]

Philo could be mistaken. Josephus could be mistaken. The Talmud could be mistaken (your claim against the Talmud is the most bizarre, as it was written CE by a number of conservative Jews who would have no benefit from dating the LXX earlier). Origen could be mistaken.

All taken together, they make the same claim at different times and from different positions (Philo, Josepus and the Talmud are Jewish sources from different schools of Judaism and Origen is a Christian source).

If you are saying the Talmud was written by Christians, why would any Christian church write a book for Jews claiming Christ is not Christ? If some fictional group of international conspirators were intelligent enough to fool the world, they would have falsified a book to make the LXX clearly THE text, not some Jewish texts or some texts by a writer who was condemned as a heretic.

The Masoretic Text (which I am assuming you hold as correct) was not written until a full millennium after Christ and its use as a Christian source is extremely bizarre, as its text was definitively changed to point away from Christ.

While the Dead Sea Scrolls are about 35% are from the Masoretic tradition, most are other and the DSS contain books from the LXX that are excluded from the MT, primarily because they were some of the most convincing, pro-Christ texts in the Jewish Canon prior to the adoption of the MT 1000 years after Christ. Yes, the MT is in Hebrew. That doesn’t make it older, nor does it make it correct.