Did Jesus and the Apostles Really Quote "the" Septuagint?

What Is the Septuagint?

The Septuagint is supposedly a Greek translation of the Hebrew Bible that was completed before the time of Christ. The academic establishment largely insists that Jesus, and especially the apostles, quoted from this established Greek translation and preferred it over the Hebrew Bible. This narrative has been repeated over and over, to the point that challenging it seems like a lost cause. Many Catholics depend on this myth since the Septuagint includes the so-called “deuterocanonical books” of the Bible—the Apocrypha. The idea is that if the apostles quoted from the Septuagint, then they must have approved all the extra books as well. But nothing could be farther from the truth.

 

The Evolving Meaning of the Word “Septuagint”

 

The first thing to understand is that the meaning of the word “Septuagint” has evolved over the centuries. This cannot be overstated. So let’s begin by defining what the Septuagint is today, and what it actually was in the past. If you were to purchase the Septuagint from your local bookstore, or download it from a digital platform, it would likely contain a Greek translation of the Old Testament books, as well as a dozen or so additional books (the Apocrypha), most of which the Catholic church deems part of the sacred collection of scripture. Once more, when people make the claim that Jesus and the Apostles quoted from the Septuagint, it can give the false impression that they approved this modern edition.

 

Augustine of Hippo was the first to popularize the word “Septuagint” in the early 5^th century AD. The word comes from a Latin word (septuaginta) meaning “seventy” (which is why the Septuagint is often referred to as the Roman numerals LXX). According to the legend, there were 72 (later reduced to 70) Jewish scholars who translated the Law of Moses (the first five books of the OT) during the third-century BC in Alexandria, Egypt. We are told that the translation was to benefit the Greek-speaking Jews who lived in various parts of the world and no longer understood Hebrew. We are also told that the remainder of the Hebrew Bible was then translated into Greek in the second-century BC.

 

It is important to note, however, that the work of “the Seventy” only pertained to the Law of Moses—not the entire Hebrew Bible. Philo, a first century Jewish philosopher, affirmed that the translation of the Seventy was confined to the Law of Moses. Josephus, a first century Jewish historian, also affirmed the same. Even Clement of Alexandria, a late 2nd and early 3rd century theologian, deemed the translation of the Seventy to be limited to the first five books of the Bible. In fact, the word “Septuagint” originally pointed to the 70 (72) scholars themselves—not the Greek translations. Over time, the word was eventually used to mean the various Greek translations. These translated works went through additions and revisions until the “Septuagint” evolved into an established form. To come to the point: Neither Jesus nor the apostles ever consulted “the” Septuagint. When the Apostle Paul asked Timothy to bring “the books, but especially the parchments” (2 Timothy 4:13), he would’ve never said, “And bring me the Septuagint.” There was no such thing as a unified translation of the Hebrew Bible into Greek.

 

The Letter of Aristeas

 

Getting to the bottom of the truth about the supposed Greek translation of the Hebrew Bible can be difficult. And the reason is simple: "Of the pre-Christian period of [the Septuagint’s] history next to nothing is known" (The New Schaff-Herzog Religious Encyclopedia, Volume II, p.117). What’s more, the entire story of the Septuagint is built upon a phony letter known as the Letter of Aristeas which claims the Law of Moses was translated by 72 Jewish scholars for the library in Alexandria, Egypt during the reign of Ptolemy II in the 3^rd century BC. The 1911 Encyclopedia Britannica confirms: “There is no question that this Letter [of Aristeas] (which is condensed in Josephus, Ant. xii. 2) is spurious [counterfeit].” The consensus is that this Letter was a piece of propaganda written later than the supposed date while using a false name. The entire story is deemed mythical since it claims each of the 72 Jewish scholars somehow produced matching Greek translations of the Law of Moses in 72 days. Yet for some strange reason, the infamous Letter is still deemed an important historical document and a confirmation of the so-called Septuagint.

 

A Biblical Case Against the Septuagint

 

Regardless of any Greek manuscripts Jesus may have consulted and quoted, it was not the Septuagint as we know it today. Despite what mainstream biblical studies would have you to believe, the testimony of the Lord suggests otherwise.

“And [Jesus] said unto them, These are the words which I spake unto you, while I was yet with you, that all things must be fulfilled, which were written in the law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the psalms, concerning me” (Luke 24:44 KJV).

Jesus referred to the established arrangement and content of the Hebrew Bible—not today’s Septuagint. He highlighted the threefold division of the Hebrew Bible which stands in contrast to the Septuagint’s scrambled order, as well as its additional books (Apocrypha) that were not received by the Jewish people. Hence:

“Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil. For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.” (Matthew 7:17-18 KJV).

 

Jesus again references the Hebrew Bible, even mentioning the smallest letter of the Hebrew alphabet (“jot”) and the smallest scribal markings of the Hebrew letters (“tittle”). I am not yet convinced that Christ preferred any varied Greek manuscripts over the established Hebrew manuscripts.

 

“As It Is Written”

 

The reason people swallow the claim that the apostles quoted “the Septuagint” is because the New Testament quotations of the Old Testaments scriptures do not always match word for word. In most cases, the writer seems to be speaking from memory or just paraphrasing, so there are usually minor differences between the texts. For example:  

 

“Man doth not live by bread only, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of the Lord doth man live” (Deuteronomy 8:3b KJV).

 

“But [Jesus] answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God” (Matthew 4:4 KJV).

 

In all, the phrase “it is written” does not necessarily mean a word for word quotation. It can suggest a summary of something taught in the scriptures. Hence, this exceptionally rare example:

 

“Do ye think that the scripture saith in vain, The spirit that dwelleth in us lusteth to envy?” (James 4:5 KJV).

 

The above statement is not found in the Bible, so it would be inaccurate to claim it is a quote from the Septuagint. In fact, there are many instances where it is clear the apostles are not quoting from the Septuagint at all. Furthermore, James is not quoting from scriptures that have been "lost." That would be inconsistent with the testimony of the scriptures regarding the preservation of God’s word. “The word of the Lord endures forever” (Isaiah 40:8, 1 Peter 1:25). James is simply writing a statement that sums up the overall truth regarding envy, as gleaned from the Bible. He is not giving a direct quote.

 

Above all, “it is written” can also signify a rewording of a passage with the purpose of making a point. Hence the following:

 

“Sacrifice and offering thou didst not desire; mine ears hast thou opened: burnt offering and sin offering hast thou not required” (Psalm 40:6 KJV).

 

“Wherefore when [Jesus] cometh into the world, he saith, Sacrifice and offering thou wouldest not, but a body hast thou prepared me: In burnt offerings and sacrifices for sin thou hast had no pleasure” (Hebrews 10:5 KJV).

 

The above discrepancy is rare, but it is just the kind that seems to validate the idea that the writer must not have been quoting from the Hebrew Bible. But if “all scripture is given by inspiration of God” (2 Timothy 3:16 KJV), then Hebrews 10:5 is an inspired statement. I believe the writer, under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, is rephrasing the text in order to emphasize the incarnation of Christ. Simply put, the coming Savior couldn’t have ears if he didn’t have a physical body.

 

In Closing

 

Despite the superiority that some claim the Septuagint has over the Hebrew Bible, the revisions of the Greek manuscripts throughout the early centuries actually brought the Greek texts closer and closer to the Hebrew texts. Not the other way around. The story goes that the later Greek manuscripts retained discrepancies and inaccuracies that had accumulated over time, so various scholars worked to correct the errors by comparing them with the established Hebrew texts. These revisions allegedly reduced the variations and set in motion the more established form of the Septuagint that we know today. To come to the point: I believe it is possible that the later revisions of the Septuagint were made to conform to the apostles’ original writings. In this case, many of the New Testament quotations only appear to come from the Septuagint.  That being said, I am well aware that my belief does not accord with mainstream biblical studies. I am in the minority. Even so, I do suspect foul play on the part of the Catholic church in order to make it seem like their apocryphal books were part of "the" Septuagint that the apostles favored. Using the Septuagint to promote the Apocrypha seems to be the agenda! In the end, whatever Greek texts Jesus and the apostles may have used were not the Septuagint as we know it today. That is the main contention here. It is a matter of fact that what we now call the Septuagint was something that evolved centuries later.

 

  

Recommended Reading

 

The following articles support the mainstream belief that the apostles quoted the Septuagint, but they also provide many important facts regarding the history of the Septuagint.

 

Did the Apostles Favor the Septuagint? by Paul J. Barth

Paul and the Septuagint Canon by Edmon L. Gallagher

 

The following reject the idea of a first-century Septuagint altogether.  

 

Jesus Christ and Apostles Did Not Use the Septuagint by Dr. Phil Stringer

Why I Don't Believe in the Septuagint by Dr. Peter Williams