Original Greek text of the Septuagint Old Testament in Greek and English side by side. Logos Bible Software is excited to offer an interlinear edition of the Greek Septuagint (LXX). As an answer to frequent requests, Logos has assembled a. The MT-LXX Interlinear Database lets the user create an Interlinear display of their installed Hebrew and Septuagint texts. It allows the user to display the Greek.
|Published (Last):||10 February 2017|
|PDF File Size:||6.95 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||9.3 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
Outline of Bible-related topics. The Septuagint from the Latin: The Greek translation was in circulation among the Alexandrian Jews who were fluent in Greek, the common language in Egypt at the time, but not in Hebrew. The full title in Ancient Greek: The Septuagint should not be confused with other Greek versions of the Old Testament,  most of which did not survive except as fragments some parts of these being known from Origen ‘s Hexaplaa comparison of six translations in adjacent columns, now almost wholly lost.
Of these, the most important are those by AquilaSymmachusand Theodotion. Modern critical editions of the Septuagint are based on the Codices VaticanusSinaiticusand Alexandrinus. The Septuagint derives its name from the Latin versio septuaginta interpretum”translation of the seventy interpreters”, Greek: This narrative is found in the pseudepigraphic Letter of Aristeas to his brother Philocrates,  and is repeated by Philo of AlexandriaJosephus   and by various later sources, including St.
King Ptolemy once gathered 72 Elders. He placed them in 72 chambers, each of them in a separate one, without revealing to them why they were summoned. He entered each one’s room and said: God put it in the heart of each one to translate identically as all the others did.
Philo of Alexandria, who relied extensively on the Septuagint,  says that the number of scholars was chosen by selecting six scholars from each of the twelve tribes of Israel.
The date of the 3rd century BCE is supported for the Torah translation by a number of factors, including the Greek being representative of early Koine, citations beginning as early as the 2nd century BCE, and early manuscripts datable to the 2nd century.
After the Torah, other books were translated over the next two to three centuries. It is not altogether clear which was translated when, or where; some may even have been translated twice, into different versions, and then revised. The translation process of the Septuagint itself and from the Septuagint into other versions can be broken down into several distinct stages, during which the social milieu of the translators shifted from Hellenistic Judaism to Early Christianity.
The Septuagint is written in Koine Greek. Some sections of the Septuagint may show Semiticismsor idioms and phrases based on Semitic languages like Hebrew and Aramaic. The Septuagint may also elucidate pronunciation of pre- Masoretic Hebrew: As the work of translation progressed, the canon of the Greek Bible expanded. The Hebrew bible, also called Tanakh, has three divisions: The Septuagint has four: The Torah Pentateuch in Greek always maintained its preeminence as the basis of the canon; it is not known when the Ketuvim “writings”the final part of the Tanakh, were established, although some sort of selection process must have been utilised, because the Septuagint did not include other well-known Interlinsar documents such as Enoch or Jubileesor other writings that do not form interlinezr of the Jewish canon and which are now classified as pseudepigrapha.
However, the Psalms of Solomon3 Maccabees4 Maccabeesthe Epistle of Jeremiahthe Book of Odesthe Prayer of Manasseh and Psalm are included in some copies of the Septuagint,  some of which are accepted as canonical by Eastern Orthodox and some other churches. The differences can be seen here.
The Septuagint includes books called anagignoskomena in Greek, known in English as deuterocanon “second canon” because they are not included in the Jewish canon.
MT-LXX Parallel Database, upgrade from Interlinear
Since Late Antiquityonce attributed to a Council of Jamniamainstream rabbinic Judaism rejected the Septuagint as valid Jewish scriptural texts. Several reasons have been given for this. First, some mistranslations were ascertained.
Third, the rabbis wanted to distinguish their tradition from the newly emerging tradition of Christianity. In time the Septuagint became synonymous with the “Greek Old Testament”, i.
The Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox Churches include most of the books that lxc in the Septuagint in their canons. Protestant churches, however, usually do not. After the Protestant Reformationmany Protestant Bibles began to follow the Jewish canon and exclude the additional texts, which came to be called ” Apocrypha ” originally meaning “hidden” but became synonymous with “of questionable authenticity”with some arguing against them being classed as Scripture.
All the books of western biblical canons of the Old Testament are found interoinear the Septuagint, although the order does not always coincide with the Western ordering of the books. Some books that are set apart in the Lxs Text are grouped together. The Septuagint organizes the minor prophets as twelve parts of one Book of Twelve.
Some scriptures of ancient origin are found in the Septuagint but are not present in the Hebrew Bible. Despite this, there are fragments of some deuterocanonical ibterlinear that have been found in Hebrew among the Dead Sea Scrolls found at Qumran:. The canonical acceptance of these books varies among different Christian traditions. For lxxx information regarding these books, see the articles Biblical apocryphaBiblical canonBooks of the Bibleand Deuterocanonical books. In the most ancient copies of the Bible which contain the Septuagint version of the Old Testament, the Book of Daniel is not the original Septuagint version, but instead is a copy of Theodotion ‘s translation from the Hebrew, which more closely resembles the Masoretic lzx.
The Septuagint version was discarded in favor of Theodotion’s version in the 2nd to 3rd centuries CE. In Greek-speaking areas, this llxx near the end of the 2nd century, and in Latin-speaking areas at least in North Africait occurred in the middle of the 3rd century. History does not record the reason for this, and St.
Jerome reports, in the preface to the Vulgate version of Daniel, This thing ‘just’ happened. It has been proposed, and is thought highly likely by scholars, that “Esdras B”—the canonical Ezra-Nehemiah—is Theodotion’s version of this material, and “Esdras A” is the version which was previously in the Septuagint on its own. Starting approximately in the 2nd century CE, several factors led most Jews to abandon use of the Septuagint. The earliest gentile Christians of necessity used the Septuagint, as it was at the time the only Greek version of the Bible, and most, if not all, of these early non- Jewish Christians could not read Hebrew.
The association of the Septuagint with a rival religion may have rendered it suspect in the eyes of the newer generation of Jews and Jewish scholars.
What was perhaps most significant for the Septuagint, as distinct from other Greek versions, was that the Septuagint began to lose Jewish sanction after [ when?
Even Greek-speaking Jews tended less to the Septuagint, preferring other Jewish versions in Greek, such as that of the 2nd-century Aquila translation, which seemed to be more concordant with contemporary Hebrew texts. The relationship between the apostolic use of the Old Testamentfor example, the Septuagint and the now lost Hebrew texts though to some degree and in some form carried on in Masoretic tradition is complicated.
The Septuagint seems to have been a major source for the Apostlesbut it is not the only one. Jerome offered, for example, Matt 2: Jerome it was in Hosea The New Testament writers, when citing the Jewish scriptures, or when quoting Jesus doing so, freely used the Greek translation, implying that Jesus, his Apostles and their followers considered it reliable.
In the Early Christian Churchthe presumption that the Septuagint was translated by Jews before the era of Christ, and that the Septuagint at certain places gives itself more to a christological interpretation than 2nd-century Hebrew texts was taken as evidence that “Jews” had changed the Hebrew text in a way that made them less christological.
For example, Irenaeus concerning Isaiah 7: According to Irenaeus, the Ebionites used this to claim that Joseph was the biological father of Jesus. From Irenaeus’ point of view that was pure heresy, facilitated by late anti-Christian alterations of the scripture in Hebrew, as evident by the older, pre-Christian, Septuagint.
When Jerome undertook the revision of the Old Latin translations of the Septuagint, he checked the Septuagint against the Hebrew texts that were then available. He broke with church tradition and translated most of the Old Testament of his Vulgate from Hebrew rather than Greek. His choice was severely criticized by Augustinehis contemporary;  a flood of still less moderate criticism came from those who regarded Jerome as a forger.
While on the one hand he argued for the superiority of the Hebrew texts in correcting the Septuagint on both philological and theological grounds, on the other, in the context of accusations of heresy against him, Jerome would acknowledge the Septuagint texts as well. The Eastern Orthodox Church still prefers to use the Septuagint as the basis for translating the Old Testament into other languages.
The Eastern Orthodox also use Septuagint untranslated where Greek is the liturgical language, e.
Bereishit (Genesis) 1 :: Septuagint (LXX)
Critical translations of the Old Testamentwhile using the Masoretic Text as their basis, consult the Septuagint as well as other versions in an attempt to reconstruct the meaning of the Hebrew text whenever the latter is unclear, undeniably corrupt, or ambiguous. Readings from these versions were occasionally followed where the MT seemed doubtful Modern scholarship holds that the Septuagint was written during the 3rd through 1st centuries BCE.
But nearly all attempts at dating specific books, with the exception of the Pentateuch early- to mid-3rd century BCEare tentative and without consensus.
Later Jewish revisions and recensions of the Greek against the Hebrew are well attested, the most famous of which include the Three: These three, to varying degrees, are more literal renderings of their contemporary Hebrew scriptures interkinear compared to the Old Greek the original Septuagint.
Modern scholars consider one or more of the ‘three’ to be totally new Greek versions of the Hebrew Bible. Much of this work was lost, but several compilations of the fragments are available. In the first column was the contemporary Hebrew, in the second a Greek transliteration of it, then the newer Greek versions each inteerlinear their own columns.
Origen also kept a column for the Old Greek the Septuagintwhich included readings from all the Greek versions into a critical apparatus with interrlinear marks indicating to which version each line Gr. Perhaps the voluminous Hexapla was never copied in its entirety, but Origen’s combined text “the fifth column” was copied frequently, eventually without the editing marks, and the older uncombined text of the Iinterlinear was neglected.
Thus this combined text became the first major Christian recension of kxx Septuagint, often called the Hexaplar recension. In the century following Origen, two other major recensions were identified by Jeromewho attributed these to Lucian Lucianic or Antiochene recension and Hesychius Hesychian or Alexandrian recension.
Relatively complete manuscripts of the Septuagint postdate the Hexaplar recension and include the Codex Vaticanus from the 4th ibterlinear CE and the Codex Alexandrinus of the 5th century. These are indeed the oldest surviving nearly complete manuscripts of the Old Testament in any language; the oldest extant complete Hebrew texts date some years later, from the first half of the 10th century.
The various Jewish and later Christian revisions and recensions are largely responsible for the divergence of the codices. The sources of the many differences between the Septuagint, the Latin Vulgate and the Masoretic Text have long been discussed by scholars. Following the Renaissancea common opinion among some humanists was that the Septuagint translators bungled the translation from interlineag Hebrew and that the Septuagint became more corrupt with time.
The most interliner accepted view today is that the Septuagint provides a reasonably accurate record of an early Hebrew textual variant that differed from the ancestor of the Masoretic text as well as those of the Latin Vulgate, where both of the latter seem to have a more similar textual heritage. This view is supported by comparisons with Biblical texts found at the Essene settlement at Qumran the Dead Sea Scrolls. These issues notwithstanding, the text of the Septuagint is generally close to that of the Masoretes and Vulgate.
For example, Lxd 4: There is only one noticeable difference in that chapter, interlniear 4: This instance lxxx the complexity of assessing differences between the Septuagint and the Masoretic Text as pxx as the Vulgate.
Despite the striking divergence of meaning here between the Septuagint and later texts, nearly identical consonantal Hebrew source texts can be reconstructed.
The readily apparent semantic differences result from alternative strategies for interpreting the difficult verse and relate intetlinear differences in vowelization interlknear punctuation of the consonantal text.
The differences between the Septuagint and the MT thus fall into four categories. The textual sources present a variety of readings. For example, Bastiaan Van Elderen compares three variations of Deuteronomy The texts of all printed editions are derived from the three recensions mentioned above, that of Origen, Lucian, or Hesychius.