Page 12 - The Emphatic Triglot

Basic HTML Version

original language of the Old Testament was Hebrew
, (
with an excep-
tion of a small part of
written in Aramaic.)
As was the case with all other
languages of that era, the Hebrew language was written
only with sýmphōnon (
), i.e. without vowels
. It was left to the reader to put in the vowels,
a complicated task indeed. (See John 7:15)
To this fact we can attribute to a great degree the differences between the
translation of the 70 (Septuagint) and the Masoretic text of the AKJV (KJV).
is the first translation of the Old Testament in the Greek
language from the original sýmphōnon-only text. This translation dates back to
the years of Ptolemy II of Egypt (285-246 AD) that was completed by 70 Hebrew
scholars (
according to tradition)
However, this work, a
s would be expected
, took
many decades to complete. The Alexandrian Jews, therefore, possessed the sacred
22 books (that were later divided into 39 books) in a Greek translation, but there
were other works -
some written in Greek
- which appended to the sacred 22 books.
However, we learn plainly from Josephus that they were not regarded as having any
Canonical authority among the Jews.
In the New Testament there are almost 300 direct or indirect references from
the Old Testament of which 70% were derived from the Septuagint. However, in
a few cases the Apostles used the Septuagint as a verbatim translation (i.e. Amos
9:11-12/Acts 15:16-17, Is. 7:14/Μatt. 1:23) because as a rule they combined it with
their own translations: An example is Μat. 2:15, “
Out of Egypt have I called my son.”
AKJV(KJV) This verse is from Hosea 11:1 “ When Israel was a child, then I loved him, and
called my son out of Egypt.” AKJV (KJV). We also have
When Israel was a lad, I loved
him, and out of Egypt I called my son” ARU. The Septuagint reads:
for Israel is a child,
and I loved him, and out of Egypt have I called his children.
It is plain in this case that
the Septuagint does not translate the original text. Thus Matthew makes no use of it.
The Apostolic (A.D. 100-140), Postapostolic (A.D. 140-260) and finally the
Church Fathers (A.D. 310-450) all used the Septuagint, not the original, but the
revised editions. Why? Because the Septuagint included many syntactical, grammati-
cal and historical mistakes and inaccuracies.
Thus, from the 2
Century A.D. we have many attempts to revise or correct
the text of the Septuagint. We therefore have the revised editions of Acyla, Symma-
hous, and the most profound of all, by Theodotionus.
Justin (A.D. 100 -165) in his “
Dialogue to Tryphona”
14:8, uses Theodotio-
nus and not the Septuagint.
During the 3
Century new revisions of the Septuagint emerged, namely those of
Lucian and Origen. The latter one made his own translation from the Hebrew creating
the ‘
’ . This meant that he wrote it in six parallel columns, which included the
Hebrew text, the Septuagint, his own translation, as well as Acyla’s, Symmahus’s and
Theodotionus’s translations. During the 4
Century there were new revisions of the
Septuagint: those by Pamphilus of Antioch, by Eusebius of Caesarea, and Hysichious.
Athanasious of Alexandria, not satisfied with the Septuagint, made use of Ac-
yla’s translations: “..
. Jeremiah says, according to the edition of the seventy transla-
tors (Jer. xxxi. 22): ‘The Lord created for us for a planting a new salvation, in which
salvation men shall go about:’ but according to Aquila the same text runs: ‘The Lord
created a new thing in woman.”
Statement of Faith, 3