Did Jesus read the Septuagint?

[Ekklesia Foundation]

This has been a fun question in many places

 

When Jesus read from the scroll in the temple, was it the Septuagint ?

 

Did Jesus read the Septuagint?

 

I must be away till after AFTER 5 July for family urgent matters.

[Ekklesia Foundation]

the LXX1 and LLX2 are wonderful workmanship, just would like to see a contrast

 

the sole reasons for this question about Septuagint

a- any venue for Athens, Greece for your Accordance workshop/presentation?

b- any timeline to include software that would also accommodate our friends which are Orthodox Greek?

 

I fully realize we can not be all things to all people,

it is just when speaking if possible always try to use a text which the listeners are accustomed

 

best wishes to those whom honor His Name and Word

[Ron Bailey]

I think you are referring to Jesus taking the scroll and reading from Isaiah in the synagogue in Nazareth? The reference to the 'opening of blind eyes' is, of course, not in the Masoretic text but is in the LXX. If he took the scroll and 'read'... about the opening of blind eyes' it would be a strong indication that he was reading from the LXX.

It has been my conviction for some time that the majority of Christ's teaching was in Greek

[Enoch]

What would you have done if you had lived in AD 150, & you wanted a copy of the Tanach in Greek because Greek was your native language, not Hebrew. Someone graciously offered to let you copy his Greek Old Testament which was the LXX. You already had copies of all the New Testament documents. So you walked to your friend's house with a supply of papyrus, a writing tool, and ink. As you were copying the LXX you noticed that certain places in the LXX the readings were different from the Greek quotations in your NT documents. Now what would you prefer to put in your own Greek Tanach for a given verse? -- the LXX of that verse or the NT Greek rendition of that verse?

 

If it were me, making my own OT, I would prefer the NT's rendition of the verse in Greek to that of the LXX, because the NT's quote of the Tanach in Greek would be the infallible representation by the Holy Spirit of what the Tanach was saying. Thus my personal copy of the Tanach would end up agreeing with the NT, but sometimes not with the LXX mss in circulation. However, persons in modern times might dig up my Greek copy of the Tanach and then cite my copy as what the LXX said and then argue that the NT quoted the LXX in preference to a more literal translation of the Hebrew.

 

Therefore, it seems to me that a lot of scholarship is confused in claiming how the NT writers used or didn't use the LXX. It seems to me that in copies of the LXX which date after the writing of the NT, it could be the LXX following the NT, instead of vice versa.

[Ron Bailey]

Are there substantial differences between pre-150AD LXXs and post-150AD LXXs? I know there were some famous 'additions' eg Christ ruling from a tree etc but are there many other differences?