A New Look at the Origin of the Bible
The SEPTUAGINT --
Is It a Fraud or Forgery?
Recently the Septuagint
Version of the Old Testament has come in for
a great deal of
criticism, one writer calling it a fraud, forgery, and "utterly
corrupt." But is this true? When was the Septuagint translated? And for
whom? What is the TRUTH? Did Christ and the apostles quote from
the Septuagint? Was it commonly used in Jewish synagogues
throughout
the Greek speaking
world? Why then did they cease to use
it? Was there
a CONSPIRACY to edit and
emend the ORIGINAL BIBLE? The truth
behind this story is a
shocking, incredible Bombshell which will shake
the world of Judaism and
Christianity! There is much more to this
story
than we have ever known!
William F. Dankenbring
In a recent research paper,
submitted to the Worldwide Church of God, and distributed to many of its
ministers, it was claimed that the Septuagint Version of the Old Testament --
the Greek LXX as it has been called -- is "totally corrupt and
unreliable!" Claiming that the
"only evidence" that a "Septuagint translation was ever
made" was a document called the "letter of Aristeas," the author
asserts nonchalantly that
"THERE IS NO OTHER EVIDENCE OF ANY
KIND THAT SUCH AN LXX TRANS-
LATION
WAS EVER MADE!" (emphasis his, p.44).
Is this claim true?
Or is it a patent falsehood? I
would normally not spend any time with refuting this kind of writing
subterfuge. However, it has impressed many ministers and several others, to my
dismay and consternation. For the truth
is, the author of this paper very obviously is extremely prejudiced and biased
and does not hesitate to make outlandish claims and reach incredible conclusions,
based on the flimsiest evidence and most superficial research!
Claims the author, there is only
"ONE and one only" Greek manuscript of the Old Testament written
before the time of Christ. He asserts,
"it is a minute scrap dated at 150 B.C." -- the Rylands Papyrus #458
which contains only the 23-28 chapters
of
the book of Deuteronomy. He goes on,
"That is hardly convincing evidence that the whole Pentateuch had been
translated 130 years earlier."
The author then claims that the
early church theologian Origen, out of a motive of vanity and desire for fame,
apparently, sought to have official church recognition for his work, and
produced a 6-column harmony of the available Greek texts of his time, called
the Aquila, Symmachus, Theodotion, and LXX (Septuagint). But the author declares
that "in reality this presents nothing more than ORIGEN'S OWN ATTEMPT AT
PRODUCING A GREEK VERSION OF THE OLD TESTAMENT FOR WHICH HE WANTED OFFICIAL
CHURCH REC0GNITION!" (emphasis his).
Besides the books of the Old
Testament canon, the Septuagint includes other ancient Jewish books called the
"Apocrypha," such as the first and second books of Maccabees. The author claims that even these books were
supposed to have been translated by the 72 scholars sent to Egypt, along with
the entire Septuagint. He asserts that no Hebrew high priest would
ever have sent these apocryphal books to be translated into Greek, and boasts,
"The fraud that is the LXX should be
clear for all to see" (p.48).
The author accuses Origen of having
deliberately and knowingly taking the New Testament quotations from the Old
Testament and inserting them into his Septuagint version as found in his
Hexapla. He charges:
"When Origen, in the process of
putting together his version of the LXX, came to an
O.T.
passage that he knew is quoted in the N.T., he simply wrote the Greek text from
the
New Testament into the Greek LXX. In
plain English, he made the Greek version
of
the O.T. quote the Greek of the N.T. verbatim . . . to give greater credibility
to his
work. That way it would look as if the New
Testament writers were quoting from his
LXX
text . . ." (p.51).
This ludicrous statement implies
clearly that Origen was a crook -- a deceitful manipulator, full of vain
intrigue, who falsified his copy of the LXX by deliberately changing all Old
Testament portions quoted in the Greek New Testament to conform to the New
Testament! Our critic points out that in
Hebrew 1:10 we read, "And, Thou, Lord, in the beginning hast laid the
foundation of the earth," which he says, is quoted from Psalm 102:25: "Of old hast thou laid the foundation of
the earth." But, says the author,
Origen added the word "Lord" to his Septuagint version, making it
identical to the quotation from the book of Hebrews in the New Testament. This, the author claims, proves that Origen
simply "COPIED the text from Hebrews 1:10-12 back into his version of the
LXX," and concludes:
"THE FORGERY STANDS EXPOSED!"
(p.52).
These are very strong allegations. These are terrible accusations. But are they true? The apostle Paul warns us, "PROVE ALL
THINGS; hold fast that which is GOOD" (I Thess.5:21).
In Hebrews 1:6, we read: "And again, when he bringeth in the
firstbegotten into the world, he said, And let all the angels of God worship
him." The author claims this was
not intended to be a quotation from the Old Testament, but just a claim made by
Paul. The author then claims that Origen
deliberately put this phrase into Deut.32:43 to make it appear that Paul
quoted the phrase from the Septuagint. Interestingly,
the phrase is nowhere found in the Masoretic text of the Old Testament! The author then claims this is a fraud. He says:
"THERE IS NO WAY ANY TRANSLATORS IN
280 B.C. COULD HAVE GOTTEN
THAT
PHRASE FROM THE HEBREW MANUSCRIPTS AVAILABLE TO THEM!
"ONCE
AGAIN ORIGEN'S FORGERY STANDS EXPOSED!" (p.55, his emphasis).
Unfortunately for our critic, his
ignorance is showing. The truth is, modern biblical scholars now know there
were a number of variant texts of the Hebrew Scriptures in the time before
Christ, and one of these other variations was the primary source material for
the Septuagint version itself -- a version in some respects distinctly
different from the Masoretic text which is the commonly accepted version of the
Old Testament, which was itself finalized during the time of the Masoretes,
about 500 years after the time of Christ.
In summary, then, our researcher
concludes, "The only LXX we have today stands exposed as a corrupt
forgery!" Unfortunately, a number
of people seem to take his assertions at face value. To do so, however, is to believe a fairy tale
or fable is the truth!
Let's
take, now, and honest look at the Septuagint, and its origin -- from unbiased
and scholarly sources, who don't have an ax to grind, but who are simply
seeking the truth.
The Facts, Just the Facts
Werner
Keller in his book The Bible As History:
Second Revised Edition, gives us an interesting insight into the
origin of the Greek Scriptures. He has
no ax to grind. He isn't writing
"contra" anything, but simply showing how archaeology and science
delve 4,000 years into the past to document the Bible as history. He writes:
"Two unusually far-sighted rulers,
Ptolemy I and his son Ptolemy II Philadelphus,
developed
their capital city of Alexandria into a nursery of Hellenistic culture and
learning
. . . and made it a radiant center of attraction for emigrants from Judah among
others. In this crucible they steeped themselves in
the beauty of the Greek language
.
. . It was the international language of learning and of commerce, the language
of
tens
of thousands of Israelites who knew no other
home.
"The
rising generation no longer knew Hebrew as their mother tongue. They could
no
longer follow the sacred text in the services of the synagogue. Thus it came about
that
the Jews in Egypt decided to translate the Hebrew scriptures. About 250 B.C. the
Torah
was translated into Greek, a fact of immeasurable import for Western
civilization.
"The
translation of the Bible into the Greek tongue was for the Jews in Egypt such
an
incredible
step forward that legend took hold of it.
The story is told in an apocryphal
letter
of Aristeas of Alexandria.
"Philadelphus,
the second of the Ptolemaic dynasty, took great pride in the fact that he
possessed
a collection of the finest books in the world.
One day the librarian said to the
monarch
that he had brought together in his 995 books the best literature of all
nations.
But,
he added, the greatest books of all, the five books of Moses, were not included
among
them. Therefore Ptolemy II Philadelphus
sent envoys to the high Priest to ask
for
a copy of these books. At the same time
he asked for men to be sent who could
translate
them into Greek. The High Priest granted
his request and sent together with
the
copy of the Torah 72 learned and wise scribes.
Great celebrations were organized
in
honour of the visitors from Jerusalem, at whose wisdom and knowledge the king
and
his courtiers were greatly astonished.
After the festivities they betook themselves
to
the extremely difficult task which had been assigned to them . . ."
(p.312).
Max I. Dimont, in his book Jews, God and History, also
discusses the Septuagint. He shows that
it was not a forgery or a fraud perpetrated by Origen upon the world 230 years after
Christ! Dimont states:
"There is an interesting legend
telling how the Greek translation of the Old Testament
came
to be called the Septuagint. About 250
B.C., word of a famous and beautifully
written
book possessed by the Jews had reached the ear of the Ptolemaic King
Philadelphus.
He
suggested that seventy Jewish scholars translate the work into Greek. According to this
pious
legend, each of the seventy scholars worked independently, yet all seventy
translations,
when
completed, were identical, word for word, thus proving God's guiding hand. And so
the
work became known as the book of the 'Seventy,' or Septuagint in
Greek" (p.114).
Modern scholars tend to discount this legend, as preserved
in a "Letter of Aristeas."
Nevertheless, whether the letter itself is part fact, part legend, is
not the real issue. All scholars agree
that the first five books of Moses were translated in Alexandria, Egypt, during
the time of the reign of Ptolemy Philadelphus!
Furthermore, all the ANCIENT sources agree that the essentials of the
"letter of Aristeas" are true -- including the Jewish high priest
Aristobulus who lived in Alexandria less than a century later, the Jewish
historian Josephus of the first century A.D., and the Jewish philosopher and
moralist Philo, who lived in Alexandria during the time of Peter and the
apostles.
The Witness of Philo of Alexandria
Philo, in his account of the history
of the Septuagint, relates the following:
"Some persons, thinking it a
scandalous thing that these laws [of Moses] should only
be
known among one half portion of the human race, namely, among the barbarians,
and
that the Greek nations should be wholly and entirely ignorant of them, turned
their
attention
to their translation.
"And
since this undertaking was an important one, tending to the general advantage,
not
only of private persons, but also of rulers, of whom the number was not great,
it
was entrusted to kings, and to the most illustrious of all kings. Ptolemy, surnamed
Philadelphus,
was the third in succession after Alexander, the monarch who subdued
Egypt;
and he was, in virtues which can be displayed in government, the most excellent
sovereign,
not only of all those of his time, but of all that ever lived; so that even
now,
after
the lapse of so many generations, his fame is still celebrated . . . .
"He,
then, being a sovereign of this character, and having conceived a great
admiration
for
and love of the legislation of Moses, conceived the idea of having our laws
translated
into
the Greek language; and immediately he sent ambassadors to the high-priest and
king
of Judea, for they were the same person.
And having explained his wishes, and
having
requested him to pick him out a number of men, of perfect fitness for the task,
who
should translate the law, the high-priest, as was natural, being greatly
pleased,
and
thinking that the king had only felt the inclination to undertake a work of
such
character
from having been influenced by the providence of God, considered, and with
great
care selected the most respectable of the Hebrews whom he had about him, who
in
addition to their knowledge of their national scriptures, had also been well
instructed
in
Grecian literature, and cheerfully sent them.
"And
when they arrived at the king's court they were hospitably received by the
king;
and
while they feasted, they in return feasted their entertainer with witty and
virtuous
conversation;
for he made experiment of the wisdom of each individual among them,
putting
them to a succession of new and extraordinary questions; and they, since the
time
did not allow of their being prolix in their answers, replied with great
propriety
and
fidelity as if they were delivering apothegms which they had already
prepared"
(The
Works of Philo, p.494).
Philo relates that "they, like men inspired,
prophesied, not one saying one thing and another another, but every one of them
employed the self-same nouns and verbs, as if some unseen prompter had
suggested all their language to them."
This feat was so extraordinary and remarkable, and of such importance,
Philo relates, that it was then commemorated by an annual festival!
"On which account, even to this
very day, there is EVERY YEAR a solemn assembly
held
and a festival celebrated in the island of Pharos, to which not only the Jews
but a
great
number of persons of other nations sail across, reverencing the place in which
the
first
light of interpretation shone forth, and thanking God for that ancient piece of
bene-
ficence
which was always young and fresh" (ibid.).
This fact alone clearly attests to the creation of this
extraordinary document of translation during
the reign of Ptolemy Philadelphus, and further proves it was at the
island of Pharos, just like the letter of Aristeas, and writings of Josephus
declare. This festival was still being
held in the days of Philo, who "lived from about 20 B.C. to about 50
A.D.. He is one of the most important
Jewish authors of the Second Temple period of Judaism and was a contemporary of
both Jesus and Paul" (ibid., "Foreword," xi, by David
Scholer).
Commenting on the origin of the
Septuagint, H.B. Swete in Introduction to the Old Testament in Greek, writes:
"Philo, on the other hand, represents
an Alexandrian tradition which was perhaps origin-
ally
independent of the letter [of Aristeas], and is certainly not entirely
consistent with
it. He states that the completion of the work of
the LXX was celebrated at Alexandria
down
to his own time by a yearly festival at the Pharos . . . A popular anniversary
of this
kind
can scarcely have grown out of a literary work so artificial . . . as the letter of Aristeas"
p.13).
The
Witness of Aristobulus, the High Priest
Says
The New Westminster Dictionary of the Bible about the origin of the Septuagint:
"1. The Septuagint. The Old Greek version of the Hebrew
Scriptures and the earliest
complete
translation of them. It
was called the Septuagint, commonly designated by
LXX,
after the 70 translators reputed to have been employed on the Pentateuch in the
time
of
Ptolemy Philadelphus, 285-246 B.C. The
number 70 may be an approximation for
72,
or
it may have developed traditionally . . . Originally the name was applied to
the transla-
tion
of the Pentateuch, but eventually to the whole Greek O.T. ARISTOBULUS, a Jewish
high
priest who lived in ALEXANDRIA
DURING THE REIGN OF PTOLEMY PHILO-
METOR
181/180-145 B.C., and who is mentioned in II Maccabees 1:10b, is quoted by
Clement
of Alexandria and Eusebius as stating that while portions relating to Hebrew
history
had
been translated into Greek previously, THE ENTIRE LAW WAS TRANSLATED from
the
Hebrew IN THE REIGN OF PTOLEMY PHILADELPHUS under the direction of Deme-
trius
Phalereus" (p.971).
Before we go on, notice that this man, Aristobulus, himself
was a high-ranking HIGH PRIEST and obviously a well-informed, intelligent man,
and he lived in Alexandria, Egypt for a while, and that he lived between 60-100
years after the translation was reputed to have taken place. This is important to consider. He very likely had access to knowledge and
information we do not have, today. His
testimony ought to be considered conclusive on this point. He testifies that indeed the law of Moses was
translated from Hebrew to Greek during the reign of Ptolemy Philadelphus. There was no doubt in his mind, and he lived
there -- and only one or two generations removed from the actual event
itself!
This would be like the Chief Justice
of the Supreme Court, today, testifying on a major matter of law or legal
precedent concerning the Supreme Court itself in Washington, D.C., which
occurred just 60 to 100 years before his time -- a subject with which a person
in his august position should be very familiar! The testimony of Aristobulus, therefore,
ought to be very persuasive that the Septuagint is not a forgery or a fraud,
and that the essential points of the Aristeas letter are correct!
This authority continues:
"The same tradition, but considerably
embellished, is contained in a letter purporting to
have
been written by Aristeas to Philocrates.
This letter is generally regarded by modern
scholars
as spurious THE SAME STORY AS THAT TOLD
BY ARISTEAS IS
REPEATED
WITH SLIGHT VARIATIONS BY JOSEPHUS, who may have had access
to
the letter" (p.971).
Notice! Now we have
two ancient authorities who confirm the essential story of the translation of
the Pentateuch into Greek during the reign of Ptolemy Philadelphus. "In the mouth of two or three witnesses
he every word be established," God says.
The fact that Josephus' account differs slightly -- has
"variations" -- from the letter of Aristeas is proof that he did not
just copy the letter or get his information from the letter itself, entirely,
but had other sources at his disposal.
These slight "variations" add further weight to the evidence
that the story is true, in its important aspects.
Concerning Aristobulus' account of
the origin of the Septuagint, H. B. Swete asserts:
The fragment of Aristobulus carries us
much further back than the witness of Philo
and
Josephus. It was addressed to a Ptolemy
who was a descendant of Philadelphus,
and
who is identified both by Eusebius and by Clement with Philometor. Whether
Aristobulus
derived his information from Aristeas is uncertain, but his words, if we
admit
their genuineness, ESTABLISH THE FACT THAT THE MAIN FEATURES
OF
THE STORY WERE BELIEVED BY THE LITERARY JEWS OF ALEXANDRIA,
and
even at the Court, MORE THAN A CENTURY AND A HALF BEFORE THE
CHRISTIAN
ERA and within a century of the date assigned by Aristeas to the transla-
tion
of the Law" (Introduction to the Old Testament in Greek, p.13).
H. B. Swete, who has studied these matters extensively,
believes that the "letter of Aristeas" itself is "to a large
extent legendary." But, he says, in
its defense --
"On the other hand, though the story
as 'Aristeas' tells it is doubtless a romance, it
must
not be hastily inferred that it has no historical basis. That the writer was a Jew
who
lived in Egypt under the Ptolemies seems to be demonstrated by the knowledge
he
displays of life at the Alexandrian Court.
There is also reason to suppose that he wrote
within
fifty years of the death of Philadelphus, and HIS PRINCIPAL FACTS ARE
ENDORSED,
as we have seen, BY A WRITER OF THE NEXT GENERATION. It
is
difficult to believe that a document, which within a century of the events
relates the
history
of a literary undertaking in which the
Court and the scholars of Alexandria were
concerned,
can be altogether destitute of truth" (p.16).
The
Witness of Josephus, First Century Historian
Josephus, the Jewish historian of the first century, gives
us additional insight into the origin of the Septuagint. His version tends to confirm at least the
essentials of the so-called "legend" as given in the "Letter of
Aristeas." Josephus, who lived in
the generation following Christ, and who fought in the Jewish-Roman war of 70
A.D., wrote in his Antiquities of the Jews this straightforward account:
". . .Philadelphus then took the
kingdom of Egypt, and held it forty years within one.
He
procured the law to be interpreted, and set free those that were come from
Jerusalem
into
Egypt, and were in slavery there, who were a hundred and twenty thousand. The
occasion
was this: -- Demetrius Pharerius, who was library-keeper to the king, was now
endeavoring,
if it were possible, to gather together all the books that were in the
habitable
earth,
and buying whatsoever was anywhere valuable, or agreeable to the king's
inclination,
(who
was very earnestly set upon collecting of books;) to which inclination of his,
Demetrius
was
zealously subservient. And when once
Ptolemy asked him how many ten thousands of
books
he had collected, he replied, that he had already about twenty times ten
thousand; but
that
in a little time, he should have fifty times ten thousand. But he said he had been informed
that
there were many books of laws among the Jews worthy of inquiring after, and
worthy of
the
king's library, but which, being written in characters and in a dialect of
their own, will
cause
no small pains in getting them translated into the Greek tongue . . . So the
king thought
that
Demetrius was very zealous to procure him abundance of books, and that he
suggested
what
was exceeding proper for him to do; and therefore he wrote to the Jewish high
priest
that
he should act accordingly" (Antiquities, Book XII, 1, p.246).
Josephus gives a very in depth presentation of the details
of this event. He tells how Aristeus,
one of the king's most intimate friends, resolved to petition the king to set
all the captive Jews in his kingdom free.
Knowing of the desire to get the Jewish books of the law, for the king,
he made the following speech to the king:
"It is not fit for us, O king, to
overlook things hastily, or to deceive ourselves, but to
lay
the truth open: for since we have
determined not only to get the laws of the Jews
transcribed,
but interpreted also, for thy satisfaction, by what means can we do this, while
so
many of the Jews are now slaves in thy kingdom?
Do thou then what will be agree-
able
to thy magnanimity, and to thy good-nature:
free them from the miserable condition
they
are in, because that God, who supporteth thy kingdom, was the author of their
laws,
as
I have learned by particular inquiry; for both these people and we also worship
the same
God,
the framer of all things" (XII, 2).
The entire account, preserved in Josephus, rings true. The king was appealed to and his counselors
backed up the request, and the slaves who had been captured by his father or
himself were released. Josephus quotes
the king's decree. The king then sent
fifty talents of gold to the Jewish high priest, and a huge quantity of
precious stones, and appointed one hundred talents in money to be used for
temple sacrifices in Jerusalem, accompanied by a letter to the high priest
Eleazar, stating, in part:
"I have determined to procure an
interpretation of your law, and to have it translated out
of
Hebrew into Greek, and to be deposited in my library. Thou wilt therefore do well to
choose
out and send to me men of a good character, who are now elders in age, and six
in
number out of every tribe. These, by
their age, must be skillful in the laws, and of
abilities
to make an accurate interpretation of them; and when this shall be finished, I
shall
think that I have done a work glorious to myself . . ."
Eleazar the high priest send back a reply as follows:
"When we received thy epistle, we
greatly rejoiced at thy intentions; and when the multitude
were
gathered together, we read it to them, and thereby made them sensible of the
piety thou
hast
towards God. . . . Know then that we will gratify thee in what is for thy advantage,
though
we do what we used not to do before. . . We have also chosen six elders out of
every
tribe,
which we have sent, and the law with them . . ."
The details that Josephus brings to the whole account,
together with the witnesses of Philo, Aristobulus, and Biblical scholarship,
all prove conclusively that the translation of the five books of Moses during
the time of Ptolemy Philadelpus was not a mere legend, but that the essential
contents of the "letter of Aristeas" are based on actual fact. Josephus gives rich incredible detail as to
the gifts sent, the return to Egypt, the celebrations, and the journey to the
island where the work of translation of the five books of Moses was to be
undertaken. Josephus records:
"When he had brought them thither, he
entreated them (now they had all things about
them
which they wanted for the interpretation of their law), that they would suffer
nothing
to interrupt them in their work.
Accordingly, they made an ACCURATE
INTERPRETATION
, with great zeal and great pains; and they continued to do
until
the ninth hour of the day; after which time they relaxed and took care of their
body,
while their food was provided for them in great plenty . . . . Now when the
law
was transcribed, and the labour of interpretation was over, which came to its
conclusion
in seventy-two days, Demetrius gathered all the Jews together to the place
where
the laws were translated, and where the interpreters were, and read them
over.
The
multitude did also approve of those elders that were the interpreters of the
law"
(Antiquities,
Bk XII, 13-14).
Now, our critic claims that Josephus fantasized his whole
account, and lied, presumably, and that there was no authentic Jewish
translation of the Old Testament, or the five books of Moses, but that there
were only small "private" attempts to do so, and that Origen in 230
A.D. created the Septuagint for his own nefarious purposes to gain favor and
fame in the Catholic Church. One is
forced to wonder -- why would somebody invent a "letter to Aristeas"
purporting to show the reasons for the ORIGIN of the Septuagint -- the Greek
translation of the five books of Moses -- in about 250 B.C. if there were no
such translation in existence whose origin demanded to be explained?
One also wonders how both Josephus,
a priest and general of the Jewish army in the rebellion of 70 A.D., could have
been "taken in" by such a "fraud" -- how Philo, a very
learned Jewish wise man of Alexandria, Egypt, could have fallen for the
"concocted plot," and how Aristobulus -- high priest of the Jews just
60 years or so after the "fait accompli" was supposed to have
occurred, could have been so completely "deceived"!
Or, is it our "critic" who
has deceived himself?
The Witness of Justin Martyr
What need have we of further
witness? Nevertheless, there is much
more. The early church leader Justin
Martyr, circa 110-165 A.D., also wrote concerning the Septuagint and its origin
and importance. In his "Hortatory
Address to the Greeks," Justin declares that he was an eye-witness and
personally saw the very cubicles that the Jewish translators had used to
transcribe the text of the Torah into Greek.
We read his own words:
"But if any one says that the writings of Moses and of