A readable and thorough analysis of the claim that ‘the (Greek) Septuagint was the first Christian bible.’ The book should be of interest to anyone interested in the origins and contents of the bible.
Early Christianity thrived in a Greek speaking world. The New Testament was written in Greek and the first Christians read an Old Testament which was also written in Greek (Septuagint). This leads to the question: is it right to say that the Septuagint was what the Earliest Christians thought of as the ‘correct’ Old Testament?
The author shows that although modern readers can buy a book called a Septuagint, it is not clear that such a book existed in the ancient world. One version of the ancient Septuagint contained just the first five books of the bible (the Torah or Pentateuch). Other versions contained the Jewish (Hebrew) Canon, and others included the Deuterocanonical books.
This means that people should not argue from early Church approval of “the Septuagint,” to an approval of a particular version of the Septuagint Old Testament, such as the Protestant 39 book, or Catholic 46 book, or Orthodox 49 book version. The author insists that ‘not a single Greek manuscript of the first thousand years corresponds to any of those specific versions of the Old Testament (Kindle 28%).
A further set of issues arises because the text of the Greek Septuagint differs from the text of the Hebrew Masoretic bible, which modern translators tend to prefer as their text for the Old Testament.
The New Testament sometimes prefers the Septuagint version of a text. For example, Jesus quotes Septuagint Psalm 8.3 at Mat 21.16 ‘Out of the mouths of children you have prepared praise…’ The Hebrew version uses the word ‘strength’ instead of praise, so it does not fit the context.
But there are also instances where the New Testament prefers the Hebrew Masoretic text. For example Hosea 11.1 is quoted when Jesus’s family return from Egypt after Herod’s persecution: ‘Out of Egypt I have called my son.’ But the Septuagint states ‘Out of Egypt I recalled his children,’ so the Masoretic version is preferred in that context.
An analysis of St Paul also shows that around a third of his quotes seem to be neither Septuagint, nor Masoretic (Kindle 42%).
What this seems to show is that some of the earliest Christians did not have an ‘either/or’ mentality insisting upon a single version of the Old Testament as ‘correct.’
Recent discoveries at Qumram show the wisdom of such an approach, as some biblical texts did in fact exist in divergent versions. For example there is a short and a long version of Jeremiah, both of which can be found at Qumram. The short version went into the Septuagint and the Long version went into the Hebrew Masoretic bible. Can either version be said to be solely ‘correct’ or should both versions be considered as equally inspired scripture?
This question becomes all the more significant when the author suggests that at the time of Jesus, up to half the books of the Old Testament may have existed with alternative versions (Kindle 35%). If this is so, then it has implications for modern Christianity and the occasional tendency to write-off the Septuagint as just a ‘bad translation.’
But what are Christians to do when the Septuagint and Masoretic text seem to make divergent factual claims. For example, St Augustine raised the question of Jonah 3.4 which in the Masoretic text says that there are 40 days until Ninevah will be destroyed. But in the Septuagint it says that there are three days. They cannot both be literally true. So Augustine argued that there is a spiritual sense in which they can both be true.
Issues like these are sensitively and thoughtfully explored throughout the book, with a textual and historical analysis of the reception of textual versions of the bible in the early Christian era.
Overall, the book is an interesting read for both non-experts and biblical scholars.
These comments are based on a free ‘Advanced Review Copy’ of the text.