[malakhi]

Hence, it would seem to me Christians, then, would perforce have to recognize that it is the Hellenized Septuagint which more accurately portrays just who the Messiah would be rather than the original Hebrew writers, and that it was the Holy Spirit who led the Gospel writer to use it. In other words, accuracy is not only not lost through the process of Hellenization, but is, in fact, gained. malakhi, the reason I pinged you was to ask if I'm overstating here, given a Christian perspective.

Oh, no, I readily concede that orthodox Christianity is hellenized.

[SoothingDave]

Oh, no, I readily concede that orthodox Christianity is hellenized.

I think he was asking if the LXX was Hellenized.

SD

[AlguyA]

"Oh, no, I readily concede that orthodox Christianity is hellenized."

So, then, wouldn't any Christian perforce have to accept some degree of hellenization to remain truly a Christian? Either that, or it seems to me one would have to totally reject the Virgin Birth, and, hence, virtually all the Gospels as untrue. Thus, to speak of Christianity somehow being tainted by 'paganism' three hundred years after Christ is to miss the point that that 'taint' is evident within the first few sentences of the New Testament. Indeed, it seems we must accept that 'taint' as, in fact, God's will.

Or we can reject Jesus as the Christ.