Greek Old Testament Modules, popularly called LXX

[Enoch]

Am I correct that Accordance does not sell the Greek Old Testament manuscripts, Alexandrinus, Vaticanus, Sinaiticus, though it sells the New Testament parts?  Why can't we have the entire manuscripts of these 3 ancient texts?  It seems all we have are edited conflated, editions, like Rahlfs.  When you go to Genesis 1:1 you see an English title Genesis and don't see what actually is at the front of the ancient manuscripts.  I am sure that the ancient manuscripts do not say "GENESIS."   Is there writing on the front of the ancient codex or something like a title page or any introductory comments in these 3 manuscripts.  I am curious to see if the word Septuagint or "μετάφραση των εβδομήκοντα" occurs anywhere in those texts, for which my belief is that none of those 3 is the actual Septuagint, but rather we have 3 Old Testaments which we assume had the Septuagint as a major ancestor.  -- Postscript: after some investigation, it appears that Vaticanus & Sinaiticus do not have the start of the Bible in Genesis, but Alexandrinus does. I found (tho hard to make out) that apparently the word

ΓΕΝΕΣΙΣ, or rather ΓΕΝΕCΙC (with lunate sigma) is the title. But in the mutilated appearance of what may be introductory pages, I did not spot any equivalent to "Septuagint" in the manuscript.  So I wonder if it was a gratuitous assumption to call these manuscripts by that name.  Now I shall be happy to be corrected if that is needed.

 

To see Alexandrinus as photo facsimile go to

7 minutes ago, Enoch said:

https://manuscripts.csntm.org/Manuscript/Group/GA_02?sequence=999

Edited February 7, 2022 by Enoch

[Enoch]

8 minutes ago, Enoch said:

 

https://manuscripts.csntm.org/Manuscript/Group/GA_02?sequence=999

Edited February 7, 2022 by Enoch
how do I delete this?

[Enoch]

https://manuscripts.csntm.org/Manuscript/Group/GA_02?sequence=999

[Brian W. Davidson]

We do have LXX Sinaiticus images in Accordance, but I would love to have the others as well. I use these images in teaching and personal reading.

[Enoch]

On 2/7/2022 at 8:52 AM, Brian W. Davidson said:

We do have LXX Sinaiticus images in Accordance, but I would love to have the others as well. I use these images in teaching and personal reading.

Now, for $64,000 tell us where Sinaiticus says "Septuagint".  I don't know why it is common to call the Greek OT in Sinaiticus, Vaticanus, & Alexandrinus "Septuagint," since so far as I know, these manuscripts do not say "This is the Septuagint" anywhere or give that as a title. Now correct me if I am wrong.  So far as I can tell, we do not have the Septuagint in existence. There are 2 tiny fragments of the Dead Sea Scrolls claimed as Septuagint, but they also do not say "Septuagint" on them. We do have Greek Old Testament from 4th-5th centuries AD.

[ukfraser]

I like the jobes & silver statement  statement taken from their Invitation to the Septuagint, 2nd Edition recently made available in accordance. 

https://accordancebible.com/product/invitation-to-the-septuagint-2nd-edition-jobes-silva/
 

'Defining Our Terms

Strictly speaking, there is really no such thing as the Septuagint.'
 

And they do a reasonable job in describing the various documents and development of what is called the Septuagint, see screenshots on the product page for what is covered. (I typically like reading a larger sample before i buy and as its not stocked in a bookstore nearby, I downloaded a sample on kindle and got the introduction and first chapter which is useful and gave me a good flavour for the rest of the book .)

Edited May 13, 2022 by ukfraser

[c. stirling bartholomew]

Quote

Strictly speaking, there is really no such thing as the Septuagint.'

 Peter J. Williams did an amusing presentation on that theme.

[Michael J. Bolesta]

On 5/14/2022 at 3:48 PM, c. stirling bartholomew said:

 Peter J. Williams did an amusing presentation on that theme.

 

Thank you for sharing this.

[Enoch]

On 5/14/2022 at 3:48 PM, c. stirling bartholomew said:

 Peter J. Williams did an amusing presentation on that theme.

Thank you so much for telling me about this Peter J. Williams. I took a look at his presentation on YouTube.  I see that I am not the only genius who has decided that "Septuagint" as popularly & scholarly used is a misnomer.  So far as I can tell, we do not have what the 70 or 72 produced.  We do have Greek Old Testaments, so far as I know, nothing substantial before the NT was written; thus all claims that "the NT quotes the LXX" are bogus.

 

Another issue which comes up in claims about NT quoting LXX vs quoting the Hebrew is the ignoring of the fact that one simply cannot quote language A using language B, though one can give the gist of what language A says in language B.  This conviction of mine stems from the fact that to be a quotation, the quote must be exact.  One may not state that "Jack and Jill ran up the hill to get a bucket of water" is a quote of "Jack and Jill ran up the hill to fetch a pail of water."  Thus I object to all statements that say that a Greek NT quotes a Hebrew OT.

[R. Mansfield]

On 5/14/2022 at 3:48 PM, c. stirling bartholomew said:

 Peter J. Williams did an amusing presentation on that theme.

 

This video has come up in Forum discussions before. I made some comments about it here.

[dvdmoore08]

The Old Testament in Greek is called the Septuagint (LXX) because of the tradition that it was translated form Hebrew to Greek by seventy some scholars. It is especially valuable for matters of textual criticism of the Old Testament. The Biblia Hebraica Stuttgarensia, a scholarly standard Old Testament in Hebrew, often cites texts of the LXX where the text in Greek significantly differs from the Hebrew manuscripts.