Transcript: Episode 0105

WEBVTT

00:00:37.392 --> 00:00:39.712
Welcome to the Stone Choir Podcast.

00:00:39.712 --> 00:00:40.752
I am Corey J.

00:00:40.752 --> 00:00:41.832
Mahler.

00:00:41.832 --> 00:00:43.692
And I'm still Woe.

00:00:45.072 --> 00:00:55.812
On today's Stone Choir, we are beginning the conclusion of our Septuagint series with our closing argument, which is the entirety of the New Testament.

00:00:55.812 --> 00:01:01.432
Going to give you another brief recap as we've been doing in the previous episodes just to help you keep your bearings.

00:01:01.432 --> 00:01:07.092
Episode 99 was a context window where we talked about, wow, this is just going to be a huge long story.

00:01:07.092 --> 00:01:11.292
Not really convoluted, but it could seem that way if you don't have it all sort of laid out.

00:01:11.292 --> 00:01:16.892
So, making the case, it's okay if you don't have this all in your head at one time.

00:01:16.892 --> 00:01:51.612
Episode 100, the first episode of the Septuagint series proper, was on the Near Eastern history where we talked about what God's people had before the Septuagint, how the Septuagint came about, how Jesus' ancestors used the Septuagint exclusively by his day, how the early church used the Septuagint exclusively for the first 400 years, and then how for over a thousand years after really the time of Augustine and Jerome, the church fell away from Greek, first of all, and the West.

00:01:51.612 --> 00:02:08.872
And as a result, Jerome's unilateral decision to use Hebrew meant that the underlying Greek text was entirely lost, such that by the time we get to the Reformation, which was where we wrapped up the second historical episode, no one cared about any of this.

00:02:08.872 --> 00:02:16.632
And so we point out in the European history episode, the only time the Septuagint came up was when we talked about it.

00:02:16.632 --> 00:02:33.872
And the reason we began there was that if we had begun here, if we had begun with our closing argument, which is all you need, once we get done with this episode and the next episode, there can be absolutely no doubt that Jesus and the apostles exclusively used the Septuagint as their scripture.

00:02:33.872 --> 00:02:36.332
And so why aren't we doing the same?

00:02:36.332 --> 00:02:37.772
It's very simple.

00:02:37.772 --> 00:02:45.312
But if we had begun here, it would have been incredibly disorienting and upsetting for people because then it would raise the question, well, how do we get here?

00:02:45.312 --> 00:02:46.032
What's going on?

00:02:47.672 --> 00:02:58.392
And so we laid out the historical case, and then we laid out in the middle portion, which we've now concluded, specifically focusing on the Old Testament, what are some of the changes?

00:02:58.392 --> 00:03:30.972
And we highlighted a few different categories of changes beginning with Christology, and then moving on to wisdom literature, and then concluding with a couple examples from Master and Job, and the timeline changes of different classes of changes that were made by the rabbis to Scripture to demonstrate that there's a lot more going on here than just a couple cherry-picked verses, and it's very important that we understand why it matters for us to be concerned about the textual basis for our Bible.

00:03:30.972 --> 00:03:40.612
Because certainly since Jerome, and absolutely since the Reformation, and pretty much everybody in the West has only been using something based on what the rabbis gave us.

00:03:40.612 --> 00:03:49.992
And so we had to make the case for why we have to listen to Jesus and the apostles, even over against all the nonsense that has happened historically.

00:03:49.992 --> 00:04:12.412
Because by the time we get done with this closing argument, you will either be convicted that you must also use the Septuagint, or you will hate it, and you'll hate all grief, and you'll want to go through your Bibles and rip out all the places, some of which we mentioned last time, where your Bible uses Greek left and right, even while claiming to be based on the rabbinic text.

00:04:12.412 --> 00:04:19.472
So the structure of this episode, the next episode is going to be a little bit different than the ones that we've done previously.

00:04:19.472 --> 00:04:27.312
For us, this is going to be kind of a speed run through a lot of content, and it's going to be about as close to reading the phone book as we ever get.

00:04:27.312 --> 00:04:29.452
And that's a very deliberate choice.

00:04:29.452 --> 00:04:38.592
What I've been by that is that the structure, whether when we're presenting the examples from the New Testament, we're going to give the full verse from the New Testament.

00:04:38.592 --> 00:04:46.952
And for the most part, we're just going to hone in on the couple changes where there's differences between the Septuagint and the Rabbinic text.

00:04:46.952 --> 00:04:56.092
And then we're going to make the case why it can only possibly be that the New Testament author is relying on the Septuagint and cannot possibly be relying on the Hebrew.

00:04:57.032 --> 00:05:04.112
So in the New Testament, there are somewhere over 300 quotations of the Old Testament.

00:05:04.112 --> 00:05:07.152
When you say quotation, we have a certain thing in mind.

00:05:07.152 --> 00:05:17.432
We have the notion of here's a verbatim quote, a string, 8, 12, 15 words, verse, a phrase, something that's lifted from one place and put into another.

00:05:17.452 --> 00:05:20.092
We think quotation, that's usually what we think.

00:05:20.092 --> 00:05:22.752
Quite a few of them are exactly that.

00:05:22.752 --> 00:05:32.672
However, there are also cases where the New Testament authors paraphrase scripture and there are cases where they allude to scripture, but it's not necessarily 100 percent sure that it's a quotation.

00:05:32.672 --> 00:05:35.312
So we're ignoring the latter two categories.

00:05:35.312 --> 00:05:39.512
We're ignoring cases where there are paraphrases and cases where it's just an illusion.

00:05:39.532 --> 00:05:47.112
Even when some of those are also examples that Corey and I would argue, those were also based on the Septuagint.

00:05:47.112 --> 00:05:52.572
But what we're focusing on here is strictly the strongest form of the argument.

00:05:52.572 --> 00:06:02.732
So what that's going to be is a case where you have a passage from the Old Testament referenced by one of the New Testament authors, which of course ultimately is always the Holy Ghost.

00:06:02.732 --> 00:06:20.712
When you look at one of those sentences or phrases that's taken from the Old Testament and reproduced in the New, as we've talked about in the past when we're dealing with translation, a lot of certain types of phrases are going to be simple enough that there's really only one obvious way to translate from one language to another.

00:06:21.672 --> 00:06:25.892
The kind of cheesy example I gave in an earlier episode was, he hit the ball.

00:06:25.892 --> 00:06:46.272
If you were to translate the sentence, he hit the ball from English into any of 50 other languages, it's virtually always going to end up being identical in that language to what I've just said in English without any variation because every language has he, it's going to have a gendered pronoun like that.

00:06:47.312 --> 00:06:52.652
It's going to have the verb hit, which is very basic.

00:06:52.652 --> 00:06:55.392
I gave the example of it's not strike or smash or anything.

00:06:55.392 --> 00:06:56.592
It's just he hit.

00:06:56.592 --> 00:06:57.412
We all know what hit is.

00:06:57.412 --> 00:07:00.332
It's not descriptive by design.

00:07:00.332 --> 00:07:02.092
The is a definite article.

00:07:02.092 --> 00:07:03.412
Many languages lack the.

00:07:03.412 --> 00:07:13.552
So there would be a lot of languages where if you translate, we say he hit ball and is just sort of understood by the listener that it's a specific ball, it's the ball.

00:07:13.552 --> 00:07:15.472
And then ball is non-specific.

00:07:15.632 --> 00:07:20.432
It could be any type of ball, but every culture has some sort of ball.

00:07:20.432 --> 00:07:27.012
So you don't know if it's a golf ball, you don't know if it's a baseball, you don't know if it's a tennis ball, you don't know if it's a basketball.

00:07:27.012 --> 00:07:29.652
Maybe it's a sort of ball that you shouldn't be hitting.

00:07:29.652 --> 00:07:33.392
But in the sense when it's translated, it's only going to end up one way.

00:07:33.392 --> 00:07:39.672
So what we're going to find when we look at the New Testament quotations of the Old, most of them are like that.

00:07:39.672 --> 00:07:46.472
Not that the sentences are quite that simple, but that there's really only one basic way for it to be translated.

00:07:46.472 --> 00:07:55.292
And even if there's a slight variation in nouns or verbs, how they come out, it's close enough that it's a reasonable conclusion.

00:07:55.292 --> 00:08:03.132
So when we're looking at the 300 plus examples in the New Testament where they're quotations of the Old, we're ignoring all those.

00:08:03.132 --> 00:08:11.472
If it's pretty much the same, and even if there's a slight difference between the Greek and the rabbinic text, if they're in the ballpark, we're ignoring those two.

00:08:12.072 --> 00:08:43.852
Even though there are a number of cases, probably at least a dozen or more, where Corey and I would also make the argument that when you look at the very specific wording, when you look at the use of singular versus plural, when you look at the word order perhaps, and it's verbatim from the Septuagint and the New Testament, in at least some of those cases, we would be convinced that that was based on the Greek, and not that it was just translated from some Hebrew forologa, and so it ended up looking the same.

00:08:43.852 --> 00:08:45.252
We're not going to make those arguments either.

00:08:45.252 --> 00:08:46.832
We're leaving those out.

00:08:46.832 --> 00:08:52.272
So I'm going to give you some numbers now for the volume of changes that we're looking at here.

00:08:52.272 --> 00:08:57.092
This is not an authoritative or exhaustive or exclusive list.

00:08:57.092 --> 00:08:58.872
This is our list.

00:08:58.872 --> 00:09:09.092
These are the ones that we feel are the strongest cases that make our point, which is that Jesus and the apostles are overwhelmingly quoting the Septuagint, and they're calling it scripture when they're doing it.

00:09:09.632 --> 00:09:13.532
They're saying, this is breathed out by God when they quote the Greek.

00:09:13.532 --> 00:09:21.432
That is the point that we want to get across, so we're going to leave out some of the marginal or weak arguments, even though we would hold some of those as well.

00:09:21.432 --> 00:09:42.952
What we're left with is 66 quotes that we're going to be discussing in this episode and the next episode where we believe the specific word choices that are lifted verbatim from the Septuagint and only possibly have come from there and cannot possibly have been based on the Rabbinic text.

00:09:42.952 --> 00:09:50.372
We stand by every one of these that if someone disagrees and tries to make some argument, the, oh, well, maybe that was just a translation choice.

00:09:50.372 --> 00:09:54.852
We're saying upfront and probably highlight a couple of places, we reject that out of hand.

00:09:54.852 --> 00:09:57.632
We believe that's nonsense for these.

00:09:57.632 --> 00:09:59.952
There are other cases where maybe you could argue.

00:09:59.952 --> 00:10:08.172
We talked about in the last episode, if I think it's conclusive and you think it's subjective, at some point it's not really a useful argument to make.

00:10:08.172 --> 00:10:12.472
So just know that there are more that we would personally consider.

00:10:12.472 --> 00:10:15.872
There are more that you'll find in some other lists that you'd be convinced by.

00:10:15.872 --> 00:10:20.752
So don't take the 66th that we're using as an example as a complete list.

00:10:20.752 --> 00:10:23.732
We think it's the strongest list, which is why we're using it.

00:10:23.732 --> 00:10:32.592
Before we get into the examples where the New Testament quotes the Old Testament from the Greek, we're first going to begin with 7 counter examples.

00:10:32.592 --> 00:10:34.212
We're going to put them right up front.

00:10:34.232 --> 00:10:42.952
7 places where the New Testament very clearly quotes an ancient Hebrew text and it cannot possibly be quoting the Septuagint.

00:10:42.952 --> 00:10:48.672
Because these are 7 examples that someone might throw out to say, well obviously these guys are lying in the Septuagint thing.

00:10:48.672 --> 00:10:55.972
It could be one or the other, we don't know, or we really have to use the Hebrew because of this and we can ignore the Septuagint because of these 7.

00:10:55.972 --> 00:10:57.892
So we're going to front load those counter arguments.

00:10:57.952 --> 00:11:02.752
We're going to look at them in more detail than the rest because they bear examination.

00:11:02.752 --> 00:11:08.412
If we're telling the truth, if we're making a reasonable argument, do those stand up to scrutiny and what's going on with them?

00:11:08.412 --> 00:11:25.252
How would you look at them when you're comparing side by side your English translation of the rabbinic text and your English translation of the Septuagint, and then you're looking at the New Testament, when they don't line up in favor of an ancient Hebrew text, what is the outcome for that?

00:11:25.352 --> 00:11:27.192
So look at each of those individually.

00:11:28.332 --> 00:11:29.952
Before we get to those, I mentioned numbers.

00:11:29.952 --> 00:11:47.812
I want to run through these briefly just to give you an idea of the scope, because two points that we made in the first historical episode are going to be highlighted by the nature of the verses that we're addressing today in the next episode, the last episode of New Testament quotations.

00:11:48.892 --> 00:11:56.572
Of the 66 verses that we're going to look at in the next two episodes, I'm going to give you the originating book in the Old Testament.

00:11:57.772 --> 00:12:00.292
So for Genesis, we have five.

00:12:00.292 --> 00:12:02.312
For Exodus, we have three quotations.

00:12:02.312 --> 00:12:03.952
For Numbers, we have one.

00:12:03.952 --> 00:12:05.952
For Deuteronomy, we have four.

00:12:05.952 --> 00:12:07.472
Job, we have one.

00:12:07.472 --> 00:12:19.632
We have 11 from Psalms, four from Proverbs, 29 from Isaiah, two each from Jeremiah, Hosea, Amos, and Habakkuk, and then one from Malachi.

00:12:19.632 --> 00:12:20.372
That adds up to 66.

00:12:22.532 --> 00:12:27.852
I mentioned there are two points in the first episode that are highlighted here, if you can remember you thinking about it.

00:12:27.852 --> 00:12:31.032
The first, remember the letter of Eristias.

00:12:31.032 --> 00:12:45.432
That ancient legend that predates Christ, that claimed that the 72 rabbis, which is again where the Septuagint gets its name, were sent to Ptolemy, translated the first five books of the Bible, the Pentateuch.

00:12:45.432 --> 00:12:49.112
Incidentally, that's a Greek word, but they only translated the Pentateuch.

00:12:49.732 --> 00:13:08.092
So, when you bring up the Septuagint with someone who either doesn't know what they're talking about or is being deliberately maliciously deceptive, they will say, oh, well, you care about the Septuagint, but you know that only means the first five books because the 72 translators and blah, blah, blah.

00:13:08.092 --> 00:13:16.132
So, even if you think that the Greek matters, you can only use it for Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers and Deuteronomy.

00:13:17.332 --> 00:13:23.512
The list from the New Testament that we're going to be looking at here, 66 examples, 20% of them are from the Pentateuch.

00:13:23.512 --> 00:13:26.132
The other 80% are not from the Pentateuch.

00:13:26.132 --> 00:13:29.672
What conclusion must we as Christians reach?

00:13:29.672 --> 00:13:42.712
When 80% of the quotations in the New Testament are not from the Pentateuch, and they're from all over the place, we have the Pentateuch, we have wisdom literature, we have the greater and lesser prophets all represented in this list.

00:13:43.912 --> 00:13:59.172
What that tells us is that Jesus and the apostles made no distinction of, well, the Pentateuch translation by the 72, that was inspired, but these other books, we don't know who translated it, we can't trust them, they can't be trusted.

00:13:59.172 --> 00:14:06.972
Jesus and the apostles condemn that because they explicitly say repeatedly, as it is written, and then they cite these other books.

00:14:06.972 --> 00:14:16.512
So do not let someone try to lie to you by using the letter of Oristeus and the word Septuagint to say, oh, well, that can only mean the Pentateuch.

00:14:16.512 --> 00:14:20.592
80% of the examples from the New Testament are not from the Pentateuch.

00:14:20.592 --> 00:14:34.292
80% of the examples in the New Testament are attesting to the fact that any random page you turn to in one of the Greek codices of the Bible, which included the Septuagint and the Greek New Testament, it's all inspired.

00:14:34.292 --> 00:14:37.692
That is the conclusion you must reach from that.

00:14:37.692 --> 00:14:41.112
The other thing worth noting is that two numbers should have stood out there.

00:14:42.192 --> 00:14:48.812
1, 11 from Psalms, which is disproportionate, that's 11 out of 66, and then 29 from Isaiah.

00:14:48.812 --> 00:14:54.692
That's 44% of the list of the verses we're going to look at today are from one book, and they're from Isaiah.

00:14:54.692 --> 00:14:59.032
All the authors we're talking about in the New Testament quote Isaiah, it's all over the place.

00:14:59.032 --> 00:15:22.572
This is important because one of the things that we also mentioned in the first episode was there's this Qumran cave thing sort of sitting there on the sideline, and the Qumran cave, the set of scrolls that were pulled out of there, people use those as examples of look how faithful the rabbis were in preserving the word of God.

00:15:22.572 --> 00:15:35.072
And Isaiah is particularly important because the claim is made that the so-called great Isaiah scroll that was pulled out of Qumran, they claim that it was dated between about 125 to 100 BC.

00:15:35.832 --> 00:15:43.252
So, a century prior to Christ, they are claiming the great Isaiah scroll already existed.

00:15:43.252 --> 00:15:47.372
It is proudly on display today in the terrorist state of Israel.

00:15:47.372 --> 00:15:54.552
Christians go spend lots of money to visit it in Uenah and wonder at their participation in Judeo-Christianity.

00:15:56.352 --> 00:16:05.552
We're not going to waste any time getting into the claims of the validity of the age or origins of the so-called great Isaiah scroll.

00:16:05.552 --> 00:16:12.232
There is substantial and I think convincing evidence that it is a fraud, at least in terms of its dating.

00:16:12.232 --> 00:16:19.272
The examples are numerous, beginning with the condition of the thing relative to everything else in the same caves.

00:16:19.272 --> 00:16:23.752
It's preposterous that one thing would miraculously survive in the same condition.

00:16:23.752 --> 00:16:29.052
And that's the weakest argument for why it's fake, at least in terms of being dated from 100 years before Christ.

00:16:29.532 --> 00:16:32.832
It's almost certainly from the Medieval period.

00:16:32.832 --> 00:16:42.932
Which would explain why there are cases where it matches, for example, the very first verse that we touched on in the Christological episode was Isaiah 7 14.

00:16:42.932 --> 00:16:58.472
This is the single most famous example of a discrepancy between the Septuagint and the Rabbinic text where all of our Bibles very proudly reject what is in the Rabbinic text and replace young woman with a virgin, because that's a prophecy of the virgin birth.

00:17:00.272 --> 00:17:16.312
That prophecy, that virgin birth prophecy is missing from the great Isaiah scroll, which if it's a medieval example, if it's from the medieval period, it's not a forgery, it's just it was much newer than they're claiming.

00:17:16.312 --> 00:17:19.792
The forgery aspects would be the false claims of its dating.

00:17:19.792 --> 00:17:21.772
For our purposes, it doesn't matter if it's real or not.

00:17:21.772 --> 00:17:37.172
We don't care if it's over a century before Christ or six centuries after, because it reproduces Isaiah 7 14, exactly the same way the modern rabbinic text does, which is to deny the virgin birth and call her a young woman.

00:17:37.172 --> 00:17:49.592
As we pointed out in the Christological episode, Isaiah himself uses the Hebrew word for virgin, think five times if I remember correctly, and then here in this one place he says young woman.

00:17:49.652 --> 00:17:57.452
So all the claims that oh well, young woman could be virgin, and so you know, we who knows, it's fine, it's okay to translate it that way.

00:17:57.452 --> 00:18:02.192
It's blown up by the fact that Isaiah himself didn't do that in his own book.

00:18:02.192 --> 00:18:11.412
So we've previously dealt with that verse, but just remember the great Isaiah scroll, regardless of its date, preserves the blasphemous reading that all your Bibles fix.

00:18:11.412 --> 00:18:14.852
Now, what's important about Isaiah being quoted here is this.

00:18:16.072 --> 00:18:24.432
There is a single quote in the entire New Testament of Isaiah that is referencing a Hebrew four-loga.

00:18:24.432 --> 00:18:28.052
So we're going to get to that in the first seven we're going to talk about in just a minute.

00:18:28.052 --> 00:18:32.252
Matthew quotes Isaiah from a Hebrew four-loga.

00:18:32.252 --> 00:18:37.172
I'm not calling that the rabbinic text, because if Matthew is vouching for it, then that means it's scripture.

00:18:37.172 --> 00:18:39.812
We'll give the details of that verse.

00:18:39.812 --> 00:18:47.732
What's important is that Matthew also quotes the Septuagint 12 times, and seven of those are from Isaiah.

00:18:47.732 --> 00:18:57.492
So even if you want to predicate your argument for the rabbinic text on, well, Matthew quotes Isaiah, so that means the Isaiah scrolls are legitimate, Hebrews are legitimate.

00:18:57.492 --> 00:18:58.512
It's all fine.

00:18:58.512 --> 00:19:01.112
No one needs to worry about the Septuagint thing.

00:19:01.112 --> 00:19:08.232
Matthew by himself shoots down that argument, because of the 66 quotes we're looking at, 12 of them are from Matthew.

00:19:08.232 --> 00:19:11.452
Of the 29 Isaiah quotes, seven are from Matthew.

00:19:12.332 --> 00:19:21.212
So, I'm highlighting these numbers up front, to give you a sense of the scope of the conclusiveness of the argument that we're making here.

00:19:21.212 --> 00:19:26.492
We're not cherry picking, we're only picking the strongest examples, and there are 66 of them.

00:19:26.492 --> 00:19:28.292
That's overwhelming evidence.

00:19:28.292 --> 00:19:36.072
And so, we're going to begin with seven examples, which is one tenth as many, where a Hebrew four-log is quoted in the New Testament.

00:19:36.072 --> 00:19:45.392
This is something we'll talk about more in the bonus episode where we talk about what a future translation needs to look like, but basically, these are no problem for Christians.

00:19:45.392 --> 00:19:59.632
In a Bible that is based on the Septuagint, the appropriate thing to do is to leave both of them alone, to leave the New Testament quotation of this ancient Hebrew text alone, and to leave what is in the Greek Septuagint alone, even when they differ.

00:20:00.252 --> 00:20:02.272
We don't need to harmonize things.

00:20:02.272 --> 00:20:08.512
It's one of the worst things that these translation committees have been doing to our Bibles, in some cases behind our backs.

00:20:08.512 --> 00:20:10.572
In some cases, they don't even footnote it.

00:20:10.572 --> 00:20:16.832
And even if they do footnote it, most people don't read the footnotes because you don't care unless you have some specific reason to look.

00:20:16.832 --> 00:20:20.652
But when you're just reading through your Bible, it's not going to occur to you to check every verse.

00:20:20.652 --> 00:20:24.852
Is this lifted from the Septuagint and not actually from the rabbinic text?

00:20:24.852 --> 00:20:27.552
You just assume that it's all there because you know what you're reading.

00:20:27.552 --> 00:20:28.412
You think you do.

00:20:28.412 --> 00:20:29.092
That's the problem.

00:20:30.192 --> 00:20:33.172
We as Christians don't need to harmonize God's word.

00:20:33.172 --> 00:20:36.112
God can say the same thing in more than one way.

00:20:36.112 --> 00:20:40.732
And the Gospels themselves are our conclusive argument for that.

00:20:40.732 --> 00:20:42.412
That's not a Stone Choir argument.

00:20:42.412 --> 00:20:49.392
The entire Christian church has always dealt with the fact that when you look at the four Gospels, they tell the same story in slightly different ways.

00:20:49.392 --> 00:20:50.852
God intended to do that.

00:20:50.852 --> 00:20:53.952
He has four different witnesses for the same story.

00:20:53.952 --> 00:20:57.132
So the events are not in exactly the same order.

00:20:57.492 --> 00:20:59.712
The quotations are not exactly the same.

00:20:59.712 --> 00:21:02.752
The details are not exactly the same.

00:21:02.752 --> 00:21:07.352
You could make a Reddit tier argument that some of them have to be wrong.

00:21:07.352 --> 00:21:09.252
We as Christians don't worry about that.

00:21:09.252 --> 00:21:21.072
Guys have spent 2,000 years trying to sort of align everything to figure out, well, obviously they're not wrong, but here's where they're missing each other by inches because they're saying different things at different times.

00:21:21.072 --> 00:21:22.352
We as Christians don't worry about that.

00:21:22.952 --> 00:21:41.992
So if we have been content to leave 4 Gospels that say the same story in 4 different ways alone, we can certainly leave alone 7 verses in the New Testament that quote a lost Hebrew text when the Greek text that we're going to be using for Old Testaments doesn't say exactly the same thing.

00:21:41.992 --> 00:21:45.072
So as we go through those, just keep in mind this is fine.

00:21:45.072 --> 00:21:49.852
This is not something we need to worry about because it's something the church has never needed to worry about.

00:21:50.512 --> 00:21:57.712
This set of 7 verses is far smaller than the so-called discrepancies just among the synoptic Gospels.

00:21:57.712 --> 00:22:01.212
Never mind all the other places in Scripture where things don't exactly line up.

00:22:01.212 --> 00:22:07.812
And we touched on that in the timeline episode pointing out the 400 years versus 430 years versus 450 years.

00:22:07.812 --> 00:22:13.552
You can have a cogent, rational explanation for some of these things without just saying, well, it's all fake.

00:22:13.552 --> 00:22:14.232
It's not real.

00:22:14.852 --> 00:22:17.912
God's not real because these numbers don't add up.

00:22:17.912 --> 00:22:18.832
Christians don't do that.

00:22:19.352 --> 00:22:23.512
So saying this upfront because there's nothing here for us to worry about.

00:22:23.512 --> 00:22:44.312
The good news and one of the most reassuring things about the fact that we have 66 verses that are from the New Testament that are very clearly based on Greek and not based on Hebrew is that that leaves over three quarters of them that they're basically the same, which goes to my translation point earlier.

00:22:44.312 --> 00:23:00.492
When you have simple sentences or even some fairly complex sentences, it's often going to be the case that when you're translating either from Greek into English with the Septuagint or from the Rabbinic text into English, which is what our Bibles are, you end up with the same result in English.

00:23:00.492 --> 00:23:08.512
It's going to come out the same way because a reasonable translation of the sentence only turns out in a couple of very obvious ways.

00:23:08.512 --> 00:23:26.832
So when you've been reading your New Testament in the 200 and you know odd nearly 250 other cases where the New Testament quotes the Old Testament and it doesn't match distinctly either the Rabbinic text or the Septuagint, it's because they're the same.

00:23:26.832 --> 00:23:27.592
That's reassuring.

00:23:27.592 --> 00:23:29.092
That's really good news.

00:23:29.092 --> 00:23:36.412
That overwhelmingly what is in the Old Testament, even in our Bibles, they should not have been used.

00:23:36.412 --> 00:23:38.432
The word of God has been preserved overwhelmingly.

00:23:39.652 --> 00:23:47.712
So this is something that should not undermine it or call into question anyone's faith, but it means we have to be careful with God's things.

00:23:47.712 --> 00:23:52.952
We have to treat them carefully in a way that they have not been treated carefully by previous generations.

00:23:52.952 --> 00:23:57.252
They're just hand-waved all this stuff away as though it didn't matter.

00:23:57.252 --> 00:24:09.372
I'm glad that I mentioned in the previous episode about Astra and Job that by no means are the things that we're highlighting the most important or most interesting things that are going to be discovered in the Septuagint.

00:24:09.372 --> 00:24:15.052
Since then, it's come to my attention that Jeremiah is more radically different than either of those.

00:24:15.052 --> 00:24:20.032
Jeremiah has been completely rearranged by the rabbis to tell a totally different story.

00:24:20.032 --> 00:24:29.992
When you read through Jeremiah in the Septuagint and you read through it in your Bible, the order of events has changed in such a way that the story is different, which makes sense.

00:24:29.992 --> 00:24:34.612
You could take any story and chop it up into pieces and tell about a order and you can tell a different story.

00:24:35.472 --> 00:24:38.412
And if you're really slick, maybe it even makes sense.

00:24:38.412 --> 00:24:42.732
Oh, and by the way, the rabbinic text is also about one-seventh longer.

00:24:42.732 --> 00:24:46.192
So it's another example of a book that's just, it's not the same.

00:24:46.192 --> 00:24:57.332
So we have centuries of Christian theology, of scholarship ahead of us, looking at the Greek as though it's the Word of God and not looking at anything else.

00:24:57.332 --> 00:24:59.572
It should have been going on along.

00:24:59.572 --> 00:25:05.372
Hopefully, and God willing, this is going to be the beginning of that period in the history of the church.

00:25:05.372 --> 00:25:13.172
The good news is that we're still Christians because God has preserved His Word and preserved His faith in us, even in spite of these deficiencies.

00:25:13.172 --> 00:25:15.852
That's no excuse not to do a better job.

00:25:15.852 --> 00:25:23.172
What Corey and I are doing here with this series is not acting as professors, we're not even acting as docents.

00:25:23.172 --> 00:25:32.792
We're a couple of guys who are turning on the light, we're pointing to the middle of the room, we're saying, I have found the book of the law in the house of the Lord, and we're pointing at the Septuagint.

00:25:32.792 --> 00:25:34.172
And that's it.

00:25:34.172 --> 00:25:44.792
We as a church have to go to the center of the room, we have to look at the Septuagint collectively, we have to figure this stuff out together as a church, which is what God has always intended for the church.

00:25:44.792 --> 00:25:49.552
From the very beginning, from the earliest days of the church, that is how it has always worked.

00:25:49.552 --> 00:25:52.312
Christians work together to understand these things.

00:25:52.312 --> 00:26:00.692
We argue about them, we fight over them, we make the best arguments, and we let those prevail in submission to the Word of God.

00:26:02.792 --> 00:26:15.952
So as we wrap up this Septuagint series with this in the next episode in the New Testament as our closing argument, just keep all that in mind, because as I said, as we go through these individual examples, it's pretty much going to be a speed run.

00:26:15.952 --> 00:26:23.792
There will be a little bit of editorializing here and there, but there's not going to be a ton of commentary from us, because the point is not to exegete these verses.

00:26:24.252 --> 00:26:31.652
The point is not to derive different or new theology or argue about any specific doctrinal point.

00:26:31.652 --> 00:26:33.652
The point is very simple.

00:26:33.652 --> 00:26:36.112
The New Testament quotes the Septuagint.

00:26:36.112 --> 00:26:39.572
It cannot possibly be quoting the Rabbinic text.

00:26:39.572 --> 00:26:44.312
Their Christians must quote the Septuagint and not quote the Rabbinic text.

00:26:44.312 --> 00:26:46.792
Bottom line, that is the argument we're making.

00:26:49.092 --> 00:26:56.512
One last verse that I want to use as an exhortation to all of us in this matter is from 2nd Timothy 3.

00:26:57.592 --> 00:27:01.732
2nd Timothy 3 does not quote the Septuagint but 2nd Timothy 2 does.

00:27:01.732 --> 00:27:05.512
The verse here has nothing to do with the Septuagint or quotes or anything.

00:27:05.512 --> 00:27:19.872
But in this epistle, Paul is writing to his friend and his pupil Timothy, who is a fellow worker with him, and he's addressing a man who, as best we know, is probably born somewhere around 20 AD.

00:27:20.832 --> 00:27:26.492
This letter to Timothy is probably written right around 65 AD, give or take.

00:27:26.492 --> 00:27:31.252
Timothy would have been about 45 roughly, not exactly, but roughly at this time.

00:27:31.252 --> 00:27:39.092
So Paul is writing to a man whose father was Greek and whose mother was a Hellenized Jew.

00:27:39.092 --> 00:27:44.612
We know the names of both Timothy's mother and grandmother because they're in scripture.

00:27:44.612 --> 00:27:47.192
His grandmother's name was Lois and his mother's name was Eunice.

00:27:47.812 --> 00:27:52.152
They were faithful Christians who raised him as a Christian.

00:27:52.152 --> 00:28:16.152
I'm saying Christian here advisedly, even though Christ had not yet been crucified, even though officially the church had not even been inaugurated, because Lois and Eunice raised Timothy to believe every word from the mouth of God, such that when the Christ came and fulfilled all the prophecies, these people all pointed at it and said, Yeah, this is it.

00:28:16.152 --> 00:28:18.412
This is the Christ who is the man who was promised.

00:28:18.412 --> 00:28:20.732
This is the anointed one of God.

00:28:20.732 --> 00:28:23.432
This is the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world.

00:28:23.432 --> 00:28:26.852
This Jesus is the one we've been waiting for.

00:28:26.852 --> 00:28:33.232
So they were always Christians because they were anticipating the promise which when they saw fulfilled, they believed it.

00:28:33.232 --> 00:28:47.532
Timothy's genealogy in this address of Paul to Timothy is crucial because as a Hellenized Jew and the son of a Greek father, Timothy was only reading and speaking Greek.

00:28:47.532 --> 00:28:51.232
He may have known some Aramaic, but his studies would have been in Greek.

00:28:51.232 --> 00:28:54.912
So keep that in mind when you hear this quotation.

00:28:54.912 --> 00:29:13.432
Paul writes, but as for you, addressing Timothy, continue in what you have learned and have firmly believed, knowing from whom you learned it and how from childhood you have been acquainted with the sacred writings, which are able to make you wise for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus.

00:29:13.432 --> 00:29:25.112
All scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, equipped for every good work.

00:29:25.112 --> 00:29:35.652
So when Paul says to Timothy, how from childhood you have been acquainted with the sacred writings, which are the scripture breathed out by God, he's talking about the Septuagint.

00:29:35.652 --> 00:29:36.832
That was all Timothy had.

00:29:37.372 --> 00:29:39.692
That was all Eunice and Lois had.

00:29:39.692 --> 00:29:42.492
They were using the Greek.

00:29:42.492 --> 00:29:53.572
This exhortation of Paul, who was, remember, the Hebrew of Hebrews, he had exceeded all of his peers in his learning of the Pharisaical oracles.

00:29:53.572 --> 00:29:55.072
He was a Greek scholar.

00:29:55.072 --> 00:29:56.772
He made his arguments in Greek.

00:29:56.772 --> 00:30:05.452
In fact, as we go through this list, there's only a single case in this episode, the next episode, where Paul does not quote the Septuagint.

00:30:06.332 --> 00:30:12.172
There's a single case where he quotes a Hebrew four-logger rather than the Greek.

00:30:12.172 --> 00:30:16.412
There are dozens of cases where Paul quotes the Septuagint.

00:30:16.412 --> 00:30:22.392
So it is unambiguous that 2 Timothy 3 is talking about the Septuagint.

00:30:22.392 --> 00:30:26.552
All scripture is breathed out by God in Greek.

00:30:26.552 --> 00:30:30.192
That is the conclusion that must be reached by what we lay out here today.

00:30:33.192 --> 00:31:09.712
Just as a brief aside, before we get into the examples where the Hebrew four-logger is cited over the Septuagint, with regard to the details in the four Gospels, for those who are familiar with history, who studied the area, this will be absolutely nothing new that I'm saying here, but for those who are less familiar with it, the fact that they are not exactly identical proves their historicity, because if you are forging something, you actually wind up with something that is too perfect to be true.

00:31:09.712 --> 00:31:14.192
This is again similar to what Woe said in a previous episode about numbers.

00:31:14.192 --> 00:31:21.732
Human beings, when forging things, do certain things that don't happen naturally, so you can detect that they are forgeries.

00:31:21.732 --> 00:31:24.552
That is not present in the Gospels.

00:31:24.552 --> 00:31:27.452
For those who are parents, you can think of a more concrete example.

00:31:28.072 --> 00:31:31.512
If you have multiple children, something happens, they tell you the story.

00:31:31.512 --> 00:31:35.872
They will not tell you identical stories, even if they are not trying to deceive you.

00:31:35.872 --> 00:31:38.992
If they are trying to deceive you, then of course they won't.

00:31:38.992 --> 00:31:43.232
Or they might tell the same exact story, if they are all trying to deceive you.

00:31:43.232 --> 00:31:51.352
But if they are telling you a true story of what actually happened, they are going to give you their own perspective, and so there will be some slight differences.

00:31:51.352 --> 00:32:16.132
The fact that the Gospels are not identical is actually an argument for the truth of scripture, because it completely destroys the academics who will try to argue that, oh, they are all based on this supposed text that came before them, of which we have no extant copies, no one has ever even found in fragmentary form, and so they are all just based on that, and they are all copies of that.

00:32:16.132 --> 00:32:25.972
If they were copies of that, we would expect precision, exactness, an identical nature as between them with regard to details, and we don't find that.

00:32:25.972 --> 00:32:29.912
And so it is actually an argument for them being historical, for them being accurate.

00:32:29.912 --> 00:32:36.472
It is a good thing that we don't have basically exact copies, because that's not how these things work.

00:32:36.472 --> 00:32:48.372
When someone tells a story, he's going to tell it to some degree from his perspective, and it will be different from another man even telling the same story, even a man who was in the same place at the same time.

00:32:49.852 --> 00:33:05.472
But then moving on to our first section of this episode, the seven examples where you have the citation in the New Testament that matches the Hebrew four-laga more closely than it matches the Greek.

00:33:05.472 --> 00:33:24.132
Again, there are only seven of these, and we're going to have many more, because 66 total over the two episodes, but we're going to have many more where, of course, the Greek is what is matched more accurately, more thoroughly than some Hebrew four-laga, which we do not have access to that, notably.

00:33:24.132 --> 00:33:30.792
So, the New Testament authors are citing something we don't have, but they're doing it inspired by the Spirit.

00:33:30.792 --> 00:33:31.892
And so, of course, we rely on it.

00:33:31.892 --> 00:33:37.052
Again, as Woe said in his introduction, we should not try to harmonize these.

00:33:37.052 --> 00:33:42.372
We should not take what we have in the New Testament and change what is in the Old Testament.

00:33:42.372 --> 00:33:47.792
We should not take what is in the Old Testament in the Septuagint and change what is in the New Testament.

00:33:47.792 --> 00:33:54.292
God has given us things that are very close, but are not identical, and that is entirely fine.

00:33:54.292 --> 00:33:56.732
God is, of course, permitted to do that.

00:33:56.732 --> 00:34:02.832
Sometimes you have a reinterpretation of a prophecy with someone writing one of the New Testament authors.

00:34:02.832 --> 00:34:05.272
Again, God is permitted to do that.

00:34:05.272 --> 00:34:11.912
We are not permitted to change the Word of God because we would like them, if you are so inclined, to match perfectly.

00:34:14.072 --> 00:34:20.532
So, the first example is Matthew 2.15, citing Hosea 11.1.

00:34:20.532 --> 00:34:23.772
This was to fulfill what the Lord had spoken by the prophet.

00:34:23.772 --> 00:34:26.672
Out of Egypt, I called my son.

00:34:26.672 --> 00:34:32.052
And then in the Old Testament, the ESV, and out of Egypt, I called my son.

00:34:32.052 --> 00:34:37.212
Whereas the Septuagint, in this case, has, and out of Egypt, I recalled his children.

00:34:37.212 --> 00:34:38.472
So, there's a slight difference there.

00:34:40.732 --> 00:34:43.212
I'm very glad that this example is first, as I said.

00:34:43.212 --> 00:34:47.252
We're usually not going to give commentary, but it's worth giving more for these seven examples.

00:34:47.252 --> 00:34:50.512
Because going into this, I didn't know what I was going to find.

00:34:50.512 --> 00:34:52.012
I didn't know, like, am I a jerk?

00:34:52.012 --> 00:34:53.352
Am I an idiot?

00:34:53.352 --> 00:35:02.352
When I look at these examples where the Hebrew four logos quote in the New Testament, are they going to completely blow up the argument we've been trying to make this whole time?

00:35:02.352 --> 00:35:08.992
Because while we've done some of this research, we had some of this put together, we hadn't assembled and finished our argument completely.

00:35:08.992 --> 00:35:15.092
So I didn't have, like, detailed notes on each of these examples to meticulously make the case we're going to make here.

00:35:15.092 --> 00:35:20.252
I wasn't sure what I was going to find when we began preparing specifically for this episode.

00:35:20.252 --> 00:35:34.832
When you look at Hosea 11, the full beginning of that in the Septuagint is, because Israel was an infant and I loved him and out of Egypt I called his children, which obviously be Israel, you know, is Jacob calling his children be the Israelites.

00:35:35.892 --> 00:35:45.652
The fact that the New Testament quotes my son versus his children, that's the distinct difference, which is why it's very clearly not quoting the Septuagint.

00:35:45.652 --> 00:35:56.752
The next verse after that is, just as I called them back, so they sued to depart from my face, they were sacrificing to the bales and used to burn incense to the graven images.

00:35:56.752 --> 00:36:16.392
So I highlight the brief bit of context around this one verse, because I think that when you look at Hosea 11 in the Septuagint, not only does it also work, like it's not like we have a case where something has been lost or confused or muddled.

00:36:16.392 --> 00:36:19.432
What we have is something that is also true.

00:36:19.432 --> 00:36:20.572
That's important, also true.

00:36:21.172 --> 00:36:24.172
Not true in exclusion of, but it is also true.

00:36:24.172 --> 00:36:27.572
In the context of this is that the Israelites were horrible.

00:36:27.572 --> 00:36:28.532
They were bail worshipers.

00:36:28.532 --> 00:36:30.052
They were idolaters.

00:36:30.052 --> 00:36:32.672
They were sacrificing to demons.

00:36:32.672 --> 00:36:44.372
So when God says in Hosea, I called my children, it is absolutely true that he was calling these terrible people, among whom the seed of Christ was carried along.

00:36:44.372 --> 00:36:53.472
Which is why when it's quoted in Matthew from the Hebrew forlaga, and God says, I called my son, it is also true.

00:36:53.472 --> 00:36:58.052
But the seed of Christ was with his children.

00:36:58.052 --> 00:37:00.132
So it is consistent in that sense.

00:37:00.132 --> 00:37:04.732
It is not consistent linguistically, but it is completely consistent theologically.

00:37:04.732 --> 00:37:06.252
That's going to be the case with each of these.

00:37:06.252 --> 00:37:16.672
So as I said, we're not going to give a bunch of rigor or morale about all of them, but it's worth noting the distinction in kind when we look at these differences.

00:37:16.672 --> 00:37:19.172
The next example is also from Matthew.

00:37:19.172 --> 00:37:23.732
This is Matthew 8 17, quoting Isaiah 53-4.

00:37:23.732 --> 00:37:37.912
As I mentioned in my introduction, this is the single example among all the verses that we're going to be looking at over the next two weeks, where the New Testament quotes the Hebrew four-loga, Frisaia, versus the Septuagint.

00:37:37.912 --> 00:37:40.932
There are 29 cases where it quotes the Septuagint.

00:37:40.932 --> 00:37:53.252
So Matthew 8 17 says, He took our infirmities and bore our diseases, which is consistent with the Hebrew four-loga, which is preserved in this case in the rabbinic text.

00:37:53.252 --> 00:37:56.632
Surely he has borne our diseases and carried our pains.

00:37:57.792 --> 00:38:07.152
The distinctive reading, which is not present in the New Testament, that's found in the Septuagint says, He bears our sins and has pained for us.

00:38:07.152 --> 00:38:10.532
So it's very clear linguistically, it's not the same word.

00:38:10.532 --> 00:38:13.292
And yeah, what do we find theologically?

00:38:13.292 --> 00:38:22.152
Is Isaiah the suffering servant passage, saying he the Christ bears our sins, less theologically sound than he bears our diseases?

00:38:22.152 --> 00:38:33.292
No, frankly, the Septuagint is more Christological and theological in this particular case, which as we're saying is absolutely no reason to go messing with Matthew.

00:38:33.292 --> 00:38:43.152
The Matthew quote of Isaiah is also correct because when you think about what infirmities are, infirmities and diseases are products of the fall.

00:38:43.152 --> 00:38:48.092
The proof of the Christ when he came was the miracles that he performed.

00:38:48.092 --> 00:38:57.932
The supernatural miracles that Christ performed prophesied in the Old Testament were the proof that this is the anointed one.

00:38:57.932 --> 00:39:08.432
Those miracles were in the neighborhood of healing the lame, healing the sick, healing the blind, healing the deaf, raising the dead.

00:39:09.632 --> 00:39:21.512
Incidentally, all things that would have disqualified someone under Levitical law from being pure enough to enter the temple, all of those were reversed by Jesus physically for those whom he healed.

00:39:21.512 --> 00:39:23.732
And yet Jesus did not come as a bread king.

00:39:24.192 --> 00:39:27.352
He didn't come for free food and free health care.

00:39:27.352 --> 00:39:30.092
He came to heal our sins.

00:39:31.112 --> 00:39:38.832
So this is a case where the disease is the lesser form of the underlying sin that is also being resolved.

00:39:38.832 --> 00:39:40.532
But we can't see our sins being healed.

00:39:40.532 --> 00:39:42.572
We can't see our sins being forgiven.

00:39:42.572 --> 00:39:44.892
We can see limbs growing back.

00:39:44.892 --> 00:39:46.092
We can see healing.

00:39:47.272 --> 00:39:58.192
The purpose of the supernatural evidence was for us to be able to believe this man who is doing these things with the body can also do these things with the soul.

00:39:58.192 --> 00:40:02.152
Surely he is from God because no one else could do these miracles.

00:40:02.152 --> 00:40:15.732
So again, in the second case, even though the Septuagint in the Rabbinic text differ in the Hebrew four logger that's quoted here differ, it is not in any way to the detriment of theology, of Christology, of anything.

00:40:16.032 --> 00:40:19.572
It's making the same point but it's making it using a different word.

00:40:19.572 --> 00:40:28.652
And so when Matthew was describing healing of infirmities and all the miracles that Jesus was doing, he was making that specific point in that context.

00:40:28.652 --> 00:40:30.172
It makes perfect sense.

00:40:30.172 --> 00:40:32.612
Both are true and that's crucial.

00:40:32.612 --> 00:40:35.892
Both of these things are true, which is why we don't have to worry about harmonization.

00:40:38.212 --> 00:40:43.952
The next example is Matthew 26, 31, citing to Zechariah 13, 7.

00:40:45.172 --> 00:40:49.412
Then Jesus said to them, You will all fall away because of me this night.

00:40:49.412 --> 00:40:54.832
For it is written, I will strike the shepherd, and the sheep of the flock will be scattered.

00:40:54.832 --> 00:40:59.832
And then from Zechariah, Strike the shepherd, and the sheep will be scattered.

00:40:59.832 --> 00:41:02.932
I will turn my hand against the little ones.

00:41:02.932 --> 00:41:09.772
From the Septuagint, in this case the Lexham, Strike the shepherds and remove the sheep, and I will lay my hand upon the small.

00:41:11.092 --> 00:41:18.572
Now, there is a difference here, of course, because one is Strike the shepherd versus the Septuagint, is Strike the shepherds.

00:41:18.572 --> 00:41:31.152
Christ is interpreting this and citing to, presumably, the Hebrew four-loga, and he uses the singular, Strike the shepherd, speaking of himself, because he is the shepherd who has struck, the sheep are scattered.

00:41:31.152 --> 00:41:42.532
The rest of the verse, of course, matches between the citation here in the New Testament and the Greek Septuagint, other than the fact that Christ says, I will strike the shepherd.

00:41:42.532 --> 00:41:45.192
There's a difference there in the pronoun.

00:41:45.192 --> 00:41:51.372
But between these two, it is, again, a small difference here, but does it change things theologically?

00:41:51.372 --> 00:42:01.212
No, because this is ultimately a prophetic part of Zechariah, unsurprisingly, him being a prophet, being one of the books of prophecy.

00:42:01.212 --> 00:42:08.872
And so he is speaking simultaneously about multiple things, and there are multiple fulfillments down through history.

00:42:08.872 --> 00:42:15.052
This is one of the fulfillments of it, of which Christ is speaking specifically of himself.

00:42:15.052 --> 00:42:26.952
The striking of the shepherd is the striking down of Christ, and of course his sheep, his primarily his apostles, but his disciples and others as well, flee in that hour, because that is ultimately what happened.

00:42:26.952 --> 00:42:32.392
So this is Christ interpreting this prophecy for his disciples, for his apostles.

00:42:33.332 --> 00:42:43.572
This is one of those minor differences, again, that we do not need to harmonize, because it is true in both cases, and it's not that we get to harmonize it if there were a problem.

00:42:43.572 --> 00:42:50.492
There isn't a problem because it's the Word of God, because it is true in multiple senses, which is often the case with prophecy.

00:42:50.492 --> 00:42:58.812
We've seen this in many other places, in many other episodes, where prophecy is not fulfilled once, but is fulfilled multiple times.

00:42:58.812 --> 00:43:15.712
And in fact, again, as I said earlier, sometimes in the New Testament, the New Testament authors, or in this case, Christ himself, will interpret the Old Testament, will tell us how this applies in this particular time and place, how it applies to Christ.

00:43:17.392 --> 00:43:27.032
CB This is, I think, the only example that we're going to talk about in either episode, where we even use singular versus plural as the determinant.

00:43:27.032 --> 00:43:33.412
If this had been going in the other direction, if this had favored the Septuagint, we would have left this verse out.

00:43:33.412 --> 00:43:37.712
So that's how stringent we're being here when we're looking at the ones we're highlighting.

00:43:37.712 --> 00:43:48.292
It's different enough because Jesus was making a specific point, as Corey said and as I was saying earlier, it's consistent, but the specific wording is not identical.

00:43:48.292 --> 00:44:04.652
So there are a number of cases where we're excluding exactly the same type of verse when we're making our case for the Septuagint, because it's marginal, but we wanted to include it here in the counter example arguments in the beginning, just to show all of our cards.

00:44:04.652 --> 00:44:06.072
Look at how close it is.

00:44:06.072 --> 00:44:14.752
You cannot look at these verses and shoot down the Septuagint based upon these quotes of the Hebrew for Lager that's lost.

00:44:14.752 --> 00:44:20.452
And for the sake of counting, this Matthew 26 31 is also paralleled in Mark 14 27.

00:44:20.452 --> 00:44:23.552
We're not double counting the cases where the synoptics duplicate them.

00:44:24.872 --> 00:44:32.052
So, if you want to say seven verses a couple of morgues or a few others that are repeated, there's a single example that's being quoted multiple places.

00:44:32.052 --> 00:44:34.752
For our purposes, that's one.

00:44:34.752 --> 00:44:40.712
The next example is from the end of Matthew chapter 27 verses 9 and 10.

00:44:40.712 --> 00:44:44.032
This is quoting Zechariah 11 12 and 13.

00:44:45.452 --> 00:44:57.372
Matthew reads, Then was fulfilled what had been spoken by the prophet Jeremiah, saying, And they took the thirty pieces of silver, the price of him on whom a price had been set by some of the sons of Israel.

00:44:57.372 --> 00:45:02.752
And they gave them for the potter's field, as the Lord directed me.

00:45:02.832 --> 00:45:10.452
So the difference between the Hebrew four log here and the Septuagint is at the very end.

00:45:11.752 --> 00:45:18.292
The cast to the potter is something that we do find reproduced in the rabbinic text.

00:45:18.292 --> 00:45:22.252
The way that is phrased in the Septuagint doesn't say potter.

00:45:22.252 --> 00:45:26.312
It says drop them in the furnace.

00:45:26.312 --> 00:45:36.772
So the entire passage in Zechariah specifically focus on the metallurgy and the use of furnaces and purification and that was the sentiment of those being expressed there.

00:45:36.772 --> 00:45:43.272
So as Matthew says, very clearly, there was a fulfillment of prophecy with the 30 pieces of silver.

00:45:43.272 --> 00:45:50.212
And the specific detail about the potter's field is used as an example of prophetic fulfillment.

00:45:50.212 --> 00:45:56.492
But when you look at what is in Zechariah in the Septuagint, it also makes complete sense internally.

00:45:57.412 --> 00:46:03.852
And there's a foundry present near the temple grounds for processing money as it came in.

00:46:03.852 --> 00:46:06.372
There are theological points that could be drawn from this.

00:46:06.372 --> 00:46:15.752
The contrast between pottery and the breaking of pottery and silver being melted down and reconstituted.

00:46:15.752 --> 00:46:20.152
We're not focusing on the theological, but this is a clear example of a difference.

00:46:20.152 --> 00:46:24.492
And again, no harm is done by what is present in the Septuagint.

00:46:24.952 --> 00:46:27.492
It's just not word for word consistent.

00:46:29.612 --> 00:46:38.792
If we were inclined to go into the theological points, of course, we would bring up things like Psalm 66, where it talks about silver being tried and things like that.

00:46:38.792 --> 00:46:41.432
This is a theme that is common in scripture.

00:46:41.432 --> 00:46:44.632
The next example, we're moving on to the Book of Mark.

00:46:44.632 --> 00:46:50.172
This is Mark 1-2, citing to Malachi 3-1 and Isaiah 40 verse 3.

00:46:50.172 --> 00:46:53.012
This is also paralleled in Luke 7-27.

00:46:53.312 --> 00:47:01.892
It is the only example, notably, in Luke, that cites to the forlaga versus the Septuagint.

00:47:01.892 --> 00:47:16.112
And so from Mark, As it is written in Isaiah the prophet, Behold I send my messenger before your face, Who will prepare your way, The voice of one crying in the wilderness, Prepare the way of the Lord, Make his paths straight.

00:47:17.732 --> 00:47:30.272
Now between the Septuagint and the Hebrew forlaga, and incidentally, this is what seems to be cited in the rabbinic text, the salient difference is there's a difference in the verb.

00:47:30.272 --> 00:47:34.512
In the Septuagint, it says observe the way of the Lord.

00:47:34.512 --> 00:47:38.772
In the forlaga, it says prepare the way of the Lord.

00:47:38.772 --> 00:47:45.372
So it matches the verb there in Mark more closely than the Septuagint, which has a different verb in Greek.

00:47:47.972 --> 00:48:04.492
Again, this is another case where the difference is worth acknowledging, but there's no violence whatsoever done to the text, which is in distinct opposition to many of the changes that we've seen, where the Hebrew is unclear, where it's simply nonsensical.

00:48:04.492 --> 00:48:13.352
What we find here is that when the New Testament quotes the Hebrew forlaga, we're not finding something nonsensical in the Septuagint, we're just finding something slightly different.

00:48:14.252 --> 00:48:22.672
And here, in this case, it's even the same sort of notion that he will look to the way before me versus he will clear, prepare a way before me.

00:48:22.672 --> 00:48:29.332
It's more or less the same sentiment, but the wording is different and it clearly favors not the Greek.

00:48:29.332 --> 00:48:37.192
Interestingly, Cory mentioned this, the Isaiah 43 is also present in this very same verse on Mark.

00:48:37.192 --> 00:48:44.032
That will be coming up in a minute in our Septuagint section, because the rest of the quote is quoting the Septuagint in Isaiah.

00:48:44.032 --> 00:48:46.212
It's not quoting the Hebrew.

00:48:46.212 --> 00:49:00.752
So here's an example where in one of these, they're called Katanas, where multiple passages are concatenated together, just stuck together as one new thought, or one complete thought that absorbs elements of different passages.

00:49:00.812 --> 00:49:09.072
Mark is incorporating the Hebrew four-laga from Malachi and the Septuagint from Isaiah.

00:49:09.072 --> 00:49:14.552
So again, does this shoot down the idea that the Septuagint is not scripture?

00:49:14.552 --> 00:49:16.112
I don't think so.

00:49:16.112 --> 00:49:19.672
They have basically the same meaning in this case, just a slightly different wording.

00:49:19.672 --> 00:49:22.772
And Mark completes his thought with the Greek.

00:49:24.352 --> 00:49:39.292
And as you can tell, we are being quite stringent in the examples we are giving, where the forlaga is cited not against, but instead of or in preference to the Greek.

00:49:39.292 --> 00:49:48.152
We are not being this stringent with regard to the examples we are going to use where the Septuagint is cited over the Rabbinic text.

00:49:48.152 --> 00:49:54.612
Because the examples where the Septuagint is cited over the Rabbinic text, as we already said, often are egregious.

00:49:54.612 --> 00:50:07.692
The first one, of course, we'll be giving when we get to that is one that is well-known, beloved by Christians where we use even in our Old Testament that supposedly cites to the Rabbinic text, the Septuagint.

00:50:07.692 --> 00:50:16.412
And so this is a case where there is a change, a slight change, basically a nuanced difference in the verb chosen, but we are still including it.

00:50:16.412 --> 00:50:21.732
That should give you an idea of how few times this happens in the New Testament.

00:50:22.092 --> 00:50:25.732
And even when it does happen, it is generally a minor matter.

00:50:27.732 --> 00:50:36.752
The next example of the New Testament very clearly quoting the Hebrew corollary rather than the Septuagint is John 19.37.

00:50:37.812 --> 00:50:45.432
This is a quotation of Zechariah 12.10, and John also quotes this again in Revelation 1.7.

00:50:45.432 --> 00:50:50.652
This is the passage where he describes, They will look on him whom they pierced.

00:50:50.652 --> 00:51:00.232
John is describing the moment where Christ is dead and his side is pierced, his heart is pierced, in fact, by the soldier's spear.

00:51:00.232 --> 00:51:13.112
Interestingly, this which John repeats in Revelation 1.7, the citation from Zechariah, John is the only of the four Gospels that mentions the detail of the spear or the piercing.

00:51:13.112 --> 00:51:17.112
The others do not, which is fine with one Gospel saying it had happened.

00:51:17.452 --> 00:51:21.552
It's not in any way an argument that we're calling that into question.

00:51:21.552 --> 00:51:26.032
I just think it's notable that John says they look on him whom they pierced.

00:51:26.032 --> 00:51:30.452
He's making a point that is only available in the Hebrew for a log up.

00:51:30.452 --> 00:51:36.352
What the Septuagint says is something we mentioned in the Christological passage episode.

00:51:36.352 --> 00:51:44.112
The difference in the word there between pierced and the Septuagint says they will look upon me because they danced insultingly or because they mocked.

00:51:44.972 --> 00:51:55.792
We talked before about how both of those were certainly true, but the point that John was making here relied upon pierced, which was present in Hebrew for a log up.

00:51:55.792 --> 00:51:57.632
We don't call that in a question.

00:51:57.632 --> 00:51:58.552
Again we leave it alone.

00:51:58.552 --> 00:51:59.652
They're both true.

00:51:59.652 --> 00:52:01.612
We don't harmonize them.

00:52:02.652 --> 00:52:05.692
We thank God that he's given us these additional details.

00:52:07.432 --> 00:52:15.032
I think I mentioned in the Christological episode, I'll mention again here just briefly, when we're talking about the notion of dancing insultingly or mocking.

00:52:15.032 --> 00:52:15.932
I'm not a huge CS.

00:52:15.932 --> 00:52:35.232
Lewis fan, but I think that the end of the first book where he describes Aslan's death in the way that horde of all those various races jeering and sneering and howling was a perfect depiction of the underlying Greek word here for dancing insultingly and mocking.

00:52:35.672 --> 00:52:37.232
That's precisely what CS.

00:52:37.232 --> 00:52:46.012
Lewis depicted with the revelry around the killing of Aslan, which of course was symbolic of Christ.

00:52:46.012 --> 00:52:49.892
Both of those have strong purchase in Christian history.

00:52:49.892 --> 00:52:54.352
We certainly would believe that that sort of mockery was taking place at the cross.

00:52:54.352 --> 00:52:57.872
But John is relying upon a text where he makes a point about piercing.

00:52:57.872 --> 00:52:58.712
That's absolutely true.

00:53:01.812 --> 00:53:08.292
This is another chance to make a point that we have made previously, but is worth emphasizing.

00:53:08.292 --> 00:53:16.472
We do not get to make our choices based upon whether or not we like a verse, or whether or not it is something we learned as children.

00:53:16.472 --> 00:53:33.552
Because undoubtedly, many of us, most of us know this verse from our Old Testament, which is the Rabbinic Old Testament, most of our examples in most of our Bibles that we have in our homes.

00:53:33.552 --> 00:53:40.092
Just because we have that there does not mean that we get to use that as our Old Testament.

00:53:40.092 --> 00:53:45.052
We have it here in the New Testament, but what we have in the Greek Old Testament does not match exactly.

00:53:45.052 --> 00:53:49.612
We lose, as it were, pierced from the Old Testament.

00:53:49.612 --> 00:54:00.932
But the standard, as we have said many times, is not whether we like it, is not whether or not it matches exactly with the New Testament, although of course that can be an argument.

00:54:00.932 --> 00:54:02.952
It is rather what is true.

00:54:02.952 --> 00:54:06.312
And God has passed to us the Greek, and the Greek has danced triumphantly.

00:54:06.312 --> 00:54:08.732
And again, undoubtedly they did this.

00:54:08.732 --> 00:54:13.932
This is the thing that they still do today when they're particularly happy about something evil they've done.

00:54:13.932 --> 00:54:16.272
And so undoubtedly they did it here.

00:54:17.372 --> 00:54:29.152
Just because we happen to like what we have in our current version of the Old Testament, which is not faithful to the Greek, is not faithful to Septuagint, does not mean that we get to keep it.

00:54:30.532 --> 00:54:39.772
Thankfully, there are vanishingly few examples of this, as should be obvious by the fact that we're now moving on to number 7, which is the final example we have.

00:54:39.772 --> 00:54:49.212
And this is Romans 11.35, citing to Job 41.11, or who is given a gift to him, that he might be repaid.

00:54:49.212 --> 00:54:51.532
That of course is from the ESV.

00:54:51.532 --> 00:54:57.912
And then from Job, who is given to me, that I should repay him.

00:54:57.912 --> 00:55:02.992
Then from the Septuagint, or who will withstand me and survive.

00:55:02.992 --> 00:55:20.092
As we pointed out in a previous episode, Job is one of those books where the differences are practically pervasive, because it is a fundamentally different book in the Septuagint versus what we have in our Rabbinic Old Testament.

00:55:20.092 --> 00:55:28.532
The same of course being true of Esther, and as Woe said earlier in this episode, Jeremiah, there are places where things have changed significantly.

00:55:28.532 --> 00:55:30.112
Job being one of those.

00:55:30.112 --> 00:55:35.032
Here we happen to have a citation to the older Hebrew forlaga.

00:55:35.032 --> 00:55:37.552
Again, we don't have access to that.

00:55:37.552 --> 00:55:38.692
That was not preserved.

00:55:38.692 --> 00:55:39.792
God preserved the Greek.

00:55:40.552 --> 00:55:43.092
But God still knows the Hebrew forlaga.

00:55:43.092 --> 00:55:49.052
And so God could inspire the authors of the New Testament to use that, to cite to that.

00:55:49.052 --> 00:55:53.312
Perhaps they had some snippet of it still existing in an Aramaic Targum.

00:55:53.312 --> 00:55:59.392
And so that is what is used here instead of the Septuagint, which has a different wording.

00:55:59.392 --> 00:56:06.272
Because, or who will withstand me and survive is not the same as who has first given to me that I should repay him.

00:56:06.272 --> 00:56:11.952
We don't lose anything here, but there is a difference and it is worth recognizing that difference.

00:56:11.952 --> 00:56:15.712
But again, this is the last of our seven examples.

00:56:15.712 --> 00:56:22.412
The rest of the episode is all the times where the New Testament authors very clearly use the Septuagint.

00:56:22.412 --> 00:56:42.532
And in many of these cases, it is a significant difference, not a trivial difference, not the difference of this verb versus that verb where the two verbs are almost identical, but rather a theological, a doctrinal difference, or even just a complete rewording in the Greek versus what the rabbis have handed us.

00:56:44.852 --> 00:56:59.152
And this is another case where when you look in the context of the Septuagint, the phrasing there of who will resist me and endure, which is I think the one I had, Corey is very similar, but basically the same meaning.

00:56:59.152 --> 00:57:05.952
Who will resist me and endure actually makes more sense in the context because this is the Leviathan passage.

00:57:05.952 --> 00:57:10.512
In the Rabbinic-based Bibles, this is Job 41.11.

00:57:10.512 --> 00:57:15.032
This is one of those cases where verse numbering is off, so it's really a pain in the butt.

00:57:15.032 --> 00:57:20.832
In the Septuagint, it's typically going to be 41 verse 2 instead of verse 11.

00:57:20.832 --> 00:57:29.732
But beginning in the earlier chapter, this is God describing what in the Rabbinic text uses the word Leviathan.

00:57:30.792 --> 00:57:34.292
Interestingly, the word Leviathan never appears in the Greek.

00:57:34.292 --> 00:57:36.732
This is a passage about dragons.

00:57:36.732 --> 00:57:42.052
The word dragon is used in the Septuagint for this whole thing.

00:57:42.052 --> 00:57:49.452
So when it's talking about who will give me that I shall repay, it almost doesn't make sense in the context of a dragon.

00:57:50.572 --> 00:57:54.992
Whether you're borrowing money from a dragon or you're resisting them, you're kind of in mortal trouble either way.

00:57:55.912 --> 00:58:05.012
But I just found it interesting that we lose nothing by looking at the Septuagint internally as being consistent, it works perfectly.

00:58:05.012 --> 00:58:11.232
So as we've been saying all along, there's no theological damage done by any of these differences.

00:58:11.232 --> 00:58:20.592
So these are cases where we can thank God that there is another way that this is being phrased, preserved in the New Testament, it gives us additional detail and nuance.

00:58:20.592 --> 00:58:24.412
Just as the synoptic gospels give us additional detail and nuance.

00:58:24.752 --> 00:58:26.012
That's a good thing.

00:58:26.012 --> 00:58:27.692
God is generous.

00:58:27.692 --> 00:58:32.232
What we cannot conclude from this is, Oh man, get rid of the Greek.

00:58:32.232 --> 00:58:34.932
I need to have a rabbi in here telling me about God.

00:58:34.932 --> 00:58:37.732
You can't possibly get there from here.

00:58:37.732 --> 00:58:47.432
And so that now concludes the entirety of all the places in the New Testament where anything approaching what is in the rabbinic text is acknowledged.

00:58:47.432 --> 00:58:53.172
Every other case from now on is an explicit rejection of the rabbinic text by Jesus and the apostles.

00:58:53.692 --> 00:59:00.432
When they're saying it is written, when they're saying scripture says, they are talking about the Greek.

00:59:00.432 --> 00:59:11.912
We begin with a verse we don't need to say much about because we have right at the very beginning of Matthew 1 verse 23, behold, the virgin shall conceive and bear a son, and they shall call his name Immanuel.

00:59:11.912 --> 00:59:13.732
This is Isaiah 7 14.

00:59:13.732 --> 00:59:17.752
We went over that in the Christology episode, so there's nothing new to say.

00:59:17.752 --> 00:59:20.212
Virgin is a word that was known to Isaiah.

00:59:20.892 --> 00:59:25.592
Virgin is a word that Isaiah used many times in the Septuagint.

00:59:25.592 --> 00:59:27.652
Isaiah uses the word virgin here.

00:59:27.652 --> 00:59:29.632
He does not say young woman.

00:59:29.632 --> 00:59:37.392
That is a bastardization and a corruption introduced by the very men who denied Christ when he was born.

00:59:37.392 --> 00:59:39.292
So no surprise.

00:59:39.292 --> 00:59:43.892
Matthew, again, we're talking about really super Jewish guys here.

00:59:43.892 --> 00:59:48.492
Some people run around saying that Matthew's gospel was originally written in Hebrew.

00:59:48.492 --> 00:59:49.612
It's complete nonsense.

00:59:49.992 --> 00:59:55.492
It's not a new story, but it's one of those cases where there's zero evidence for it.

00:59:55.492 --> 01:00:01.592
The accounts don't really make sense and they're ambiguous enough that we can't draw any conclusions from it.

01:00:01.592 --> 01:00:07.612
We can't ever draw extensive conclusions from the text where Matthew repeatedly quotes the Septuagint.

01:00:07.612 --> 01:00:11.232
I've said 12 times, we're going to have Matthew quotes here.

01:00:11.232 --> 01:00:16.452
And he makes wordplay in things that only work in Greek.

01:00:16.452 --> 01:00:17.552
They wouldn't have worked in Hebrew.

01:00:17.552 --> 01:00:18.732
They wouldn't have worked in Aramaic.

01:00:19.332 --> 01:00:27.172
Some of the things that he says that we have preserved in the Greek could not have been translated from one of those languages into Greek.

01:00:27.172 --> 01:00:29.192
You couldn't get the nuances present.

01:00:29.192 --> 01:00:37.432
So there's not a lot to say about Isaiah 714 beyond the New Testament tells us that he was to be born of a virgin.

01:00:39.272 --> 01:00:44.252
The next example is Matthew 3.3, citing to Isaiah 43 as mentioned earlier.

01:00:45.452 --> 01:00:51.172
The voice of one crying in the wilderness, prepare the way of the Lord, make his paths straight.

01:00:51.172 --> 01:00:59.692
And then from the Septuagint, a voice of one crying out in the wilderness, prepare the way of the Lord, make straight the paths of our God.

01:00:59.692 --> 01:01:01.732
Essentially identical.

01:01:01.732 --> 01:01:09.172
Whereas the Rabbinic text has, clear in the desert a road for the Lord, level in the wilderness a highway for our God.

01:01:11.512 --> 01:01:24.272
There are some pretty clear differences there, and it is worth noting again that as between the Septuagint and the New Testament in the Greek, these citations are virtually identical.

01:01:24.272 --> 01:01:28.972
It is very clear that Matthew is citing to the Septuagint in this case.

01:01:28.972 --> 01:01:32.312
He is practically citing it word for word.

01:01:32.312 --> 01:01:37.732
What we would in modern English parlance call an actual citation or a quote.

01:01:39.212 --> 01:01:43.252
BF And thankfully, this is one of the examples where it basically means the same thing.

01:01:43.252 --> 01:01:50.472
So no nuance has been lost, but the word choice very clearly can only possibly have been from the Septuagint.

01:01:50.472 --> 01:01:57.672
Next example is from Matthew 3.17, which is also present in Mark and Luke.

01:01:57.672 --> 01:02:06.312
This is a quote, and it's using a phrase that's present in Genesis 22.2 and then repeated in verses 12 and 16.

01:02:07.652 --> 01:02:15.592
Matthew writes, A voice from heaven said, This is my beloved son, with whom I am well pleased.

01:02:15.592 --> 01:02:25.112
And the Septuagint, which is representing what's quoted here by God the Father from heaven, from Genesis 22.

01:02:25.112 --> 01:02:29.492
And he said, Take your beloved son, whom you love, Isaac.

01:02:30.572 --> 01:02:33.852
So what we have here is beloved son, whom you love.

01:02:33.852 --> 01:02:43.192
The rabbinic text says, Now I know that you fear God, seeing that you have not withheld your son, your only son, from me.

01:02:43.192 --> 01:02:44.632
Now both are true.

01:02:44.632 --> 01:03:01.452
But in this case, the specific phrasing of, Take your beloved son, whom you love, is not only word for word in Matthew, Mark, and Luke from Genesis 22, repeated in verse 2, 12, and 16.

01:03:01.452 --> 01:03:10.592
But this is crucial because this is a phrase that would have been very, very well-known to those who heard God the Father speak from heaven.

01:03:10.592 --> 01:03:21.292
When he said, This is my beloved son, with whom I am well-pleased, they would have heard echoes of what was said about Isaac very clearly.

01:03:21.832 --> 01:03:27.392
And that's simply lost in the Rabbinic, where you have withheld your son, your only son.

01:03:27.392 --> 01:03:35.832
So even though it's true, it's not a theological reduction, what you lose is the immediacy of the witness of those who would have heard that.

01:03:35.832 --> 01:03:41.752
They would have known instantly that this was typology manifest before their very eyes.

01:03:43.112 --> 01:04:00.312
This is a case where this is actually, I'm going to include it twice because it's repeated again, Matthew 17, 5 at the transfiguration, which is notable because at the beginning we have the baptism, where God the Father says, this is my beloved son with whom I am well pleased.

01:04:00.312 --> 01:04:03.772
God repeats that in Matthew 17, 5.

01:04:03.772 --> 01:04:05.492
This is the quote from Matthew.

01:04:05.492 --> 01:04:09.832
A voice from the cloud said, this is my beloved son with whom I am well pleased.

01:04:09.832 --> 01:04:11.752
Listen to him.

01:04:11.752 --> 01:04:24.852
So this specific phrase of my beloved son was so important that God the Father spoke himself from heaven, not once but twice, first at Christ's baptism and again at his transfiguration.

01:04:26.672 --> 01:04:35.112
So the next example is from Matthew 4 verses 15 through 16, citing to again Isaiah 9, 1 through 2.

01:04:35.112 --> 01:04:38.452
There's a different versification in your Old Testament.

01:04:38.452 --> 01:04:42.632
This will be the end of chapter 8, the beginning of chapter 9.

01:04:44.032 --> 01:04:48.252
The land of Zebulun and the land of Naphtali, the way of the sea beyond the Jordan.

01:04:49.192 --> 01:04:54.052
Galilee of the nations, the people dwelling in darkness, have seen a great light.

01:04:54.052 --> 01:04:59.052
And for those dwelling in the region and shadow of death, on them a light has dawned.

01:05:00.772 --> 01:05:07.492
And then from the Septuagint, I'm going to just read the Septuagint case, because you will see how close these are.

01:05:07.492 --> 01:05:08.712
These are practically identical.

01:05:08.712 --> 01:05:13.092
Again, this approaches what we would call a quote in modern English.

01:05:14.172 --> 01:05:23.472
The land of Zebulun, the land of Naphtali, and the rest who inhabit the seashore and beyond the Jordan, Galilee of the nations, the parts of Judea.

01:05:23.472 --> 01:05:27.172
O you people who walk in darkness, see a great light.

01:05:27.172 --> 01:05:33.352
O you who live in the country and in the shadow of death, light will shine on you.

01:05:33.352 --> 01:05:38.192
And so you can see between these two, it is practically identical.

01:05:38.192 --> 01:05:42.572
This is again approaching what we would call a quote in English.

01:05:42.572 --> 01:05:45.532
There are some differences with the rabbinic text.

01:05:47.952 --> 01:05:53.172
In the former time, he brought into contempt the land of Zebulun and the land of Naphtali.

01:05:53.172 --> 01:06:06.212
But in the latter time, he has made glorious the way of the sea, the land beyond the Jordan, Galilee of the nations, and notably this is one of the times where the ESV decides to actually translate that word as nations instead of Gentiles.

01:06:06.212 --> 01:06:09.092
A separate point we've made previously.

01:06:09.092 --> 01:06:12.232
The people who walked in darkness have seen a great light.

01:06:12.852 --> 01:06:18.552
Those who dwelt in a land of deep darkness, on them, has light shown.

01:06:18.552 --> 01:06:21.512
This is one of the cases where there are similarities, certainly.

01:06:21.512 --> 01:06:23.852
Much of it has been preserved.

01:06:23.852 --> 01:06:28.172
But there are also some pretty significant differences.

01:06:28.172 --> 01:06:32.612
Not all of that, incidentally, comes through in the ESV translation.

01:06:32.612 --> 01:06:42.372
Some of it you have to go to Jewish translations of the Old Testament, of their version of the Old Testament, to get sort of the full sense of what they're saying.

01:06:42.372 --> 01:06:47.352
Because again, the ESV and others often pull from the Septuagint.

01:06:47.352 --> 01:06:50.412
Sometimes they will footnote it, sometimes they will not.

01:06:50.412 --> 01:06:57.632
And so there's actually a phrase in there, in the so-called Hebrew, that we don't get in our version.

01:06:57.632 --> 01:07:01.932
But the latter hath dealt a more grievous blow by the way of the sea.

01:07:01.932 --> 01:07:07.312
That is, a phrase that is affixed after the Comet land of Zebulun, the land of Naphtali.

01:07:07.912 --> 01:07:12.292
You will find that in Jewish translations of the Old Testament.

01:07:12.292 --> 01:07:21.812
You'll note that that's not really there in what we have, because it says he has made glorious the way of the sea.

01:07:23.112 --> 01:07:28.032
Sometimes you will note the translation committees play some games with the Old Testament.

01:07:28.032 --> 01:07:42.652
And as we have noted, if it were the case that the Hebrew given to us by the rabbis were the word of God, then we would not be entitled to use the Greek to fix it.

01:07:42.652 --> 01:07:51.212
Just as we could not and certainly will not employ any sort of Hebrew or anything like that to fix the Greek.

01:07:51.212 --> 01:07:52.592
We don't get to pick and choose.

01:07:52.592 --> 01:07:55.072
We don't get to fix the word of God.

01:07:55.072 --> 01:07:56.992
God has promised to preserve it.

01:07:56.992 --> 01:07:59.752
He has preserved it for us in the Greek.

01:07:59.752 --> 01:08:00.872
That is what we are arguing.

01:08:01.312 --> 01:08:08.432
But, those who want to argue that it is the Hebrew, they aren't behaving as if the Hebrew is the word of God.

01:08:08.432 --> 01:08:10.172
They change it whenever they please.

01:08:10.172 --> 01:08:12.892
They pick and choose from different manuscripts.

01:08:12.892 --> 01:08:16.752
They pull things from the Septuagint when they don't understand the Hebrew.

01:08:16.752 --> 01:08:26.732
And so, you will see here again, to go back to the main point that we are making, the citation in the New Testament is what is said in the Old Testament.

01:08:27.332 --> 01:08:40.452
You have something that is different, not necessarily fundamentally different in the Rabbinic text, but different enough that it is obvious the New Testament author is citing to the Greek because that was his scripture.

01:08:42.352 --> 01:08:48.052
So just to highlight the two specific things there, because that was a pretty long explanation.

01:08:48.052 --> 01:08:53.512
The distinctive is sitting versus walking, and the region and shadow of death.

01:08:53.512 --> 01:09:00.212
Those are the things that make it very clear that Matthew 4, 15, and 16 is not quoting the Rabbinic.

01:09:01.512 --> 01:09:05.192
The next example is from Matthew 11, 10.

01:09:05.192 --> 01:09:08.092
This is again quoting Malachi 3, 1.

01:09:08.092 --> 01:09:09.772
Remember that from before.

01:09:09.772 --> 01:09:13.452
Mark quotes Malachi 3, 1 from a Hebrew four logger.

01:09:13.452 --> 01:09:19.972
Here in Matthew we have the Septuagint version of Malachi 3, 1 being quoted.

01:09:19.972 --> 01:09:29.612
Matthew writes, This is he of whom it is written, Behold, I send my messenger before your face, Who will prepare your way before you.

01:09:29.612 --> 01:09:39.972
So the difference here between the Septuagint and the Rabbinic, where the New Testament preserves the Septuagint, is before your face versus before me.

01:09:39.972 --> 01:09:46.772
And although those are both kind of conceptually the same, the specific wording can only possibly be from the Septuagint.

01:09:47.652 --> 01:10:04.192
So again, when you look at the fact that Malachi 3.1 was quoted from Mark, if you think that shoots down the Septuagint, you've already lost that point entirely because Matthew 11.10 then turns around and quotes the Septuagint for the exact same verse in a very distinct way.

01:10:06.612 --> 01:10:14.092
The next example is still in the Book of Matthew and the very next chapter, Matthew 12, 18-21, citing to Isaiah 42, 1-4.

01:10:16.012 --> 01:10:21.252
Behold my servant whom I have chosen, my beloved with whom my soul is well pleased.

01:10:21.252 --> 01:10:25.892
I will put my spirit upon him, and he will proclaim justice to the nations.

01:10:25.892 --> 01:10:30.772
He will not quarrel or cry aloud, nor will anyone hear his voice in the streets.

01:10:30.772 --> 01:10:39.912
A bruised reed he will not break, and a smoldering wick he will not quench, until he brings justice to victory, and in his name the nations will hope.

01:10:41.992 --> 01:10:48.092
Between the Rabbinic text and the Septuagint, there is large agreement here.

01:10:48.092 --> 01:10:51.152
However, there is a notable difference.

01:10:51.152 --> 01:11:03.492
What we have here, and the nations will hope in his name, that is from the Septuagint, which is of course aligned with, and in his name the nations will hope, it is the same statement.

01:11:03.492 --> 01:11:07.132
The Rabbinic text says, and the coastlands wait for his law.

01:11:09.812 --> 01:11:11.952
Not the same statement.

01:11:11.952 --> 01:11:13.812
This is a pretty significant difference.

01:11:13.812 --> 01:11:26.772
It's very clear that what is being cited here is from the Septuagint, not from some supposed Hebrew text, not from the Rabbinic text, certainly, that we use as our Old Testament today.

01:11:28.492 --> 01:11:33.592
And I think this is a significant example, because this is very clearly Rabbinic corruption.

01:11:34.112 --> 01:11:45.912
The reason we included that long three verses, even though it's only the very end that's different, is that this is about the gospel being taken to everyone other than Jews as well.

01:11:45.912 --> 01:11:57.332
So when it changed by the rabbis from, in his name, the nations will hope, to the coastlands will wait for his law, that's neutering the gospel.

01:11:57.332 --> 01:12:06.232
That is a significant theological reduction that, as we've said in the past episodes, glorifies Jews and excludes everyone else.

01:12:06.232 --> 01:12:08.692
This was very clearly an evil change.

01:12:08.692 --> 01:12:14.372
This wasn't simply a minor difference or certainly even a translation variance.

01:12:14.372 --> 01:12:16.272
This was actual malice.

01:12:18.632 --> 01:12:33.412
And to make sure that I'm clear, when I read that set of verses from the New Testament, I changed the word Gentiles two times to nations, because that is the correct translation.

01:12:33.412 --> 01:12:36.252
I do the same thing when I record the Daily Devotions.

01:12:36.252 --> 01:12:45.732
I changed the word Gentiles, which is Judaizing, as it is used in modern English, because of course it was fine in Latin, but today it's used for Judaizing.

01:12:45.732 --> 01:12:47.732
I changed that to the nations.

01:12:47.732 --> 01:13:00.372
It is worth noting the ESV does play games there and uses the word Gentiles, because they are engaged in the exact same kind of Judaizing that the rabbis did by corrupting that section in the Old Testament.

01:13:00.712 --> 01:13:13.692
Jared Larson The next example we have is from Matthew 13 verses 14 through 15, which are a quotation of Isaiah 6, 9 through 10.

01:13:13.692 --> 01:13:18.712
And this is a passage that's also repeated in Acts 28, 26 through 27.

01:13:18.712 --> 01:13:21.372
It's only counting it once, but it shows up a couple times.

01:13:21.972 --> 01:13:30.152
I'm going to read a longer passage here even though there's only a small change, because again, the context here is really important for the nature of the change.

01:13:30.152 --> 01:13:32.912
This is another one of the malicious ones by the rabbis.

01:13:35.432 --> 01:13:38.972
In this case, I'm going to be reading the quotation from Acts rather than Matthew.

01:13:38.972 --> 01:13:43.412
They're basically saying there's just a slightly more context in Acts.

01:13:43.412 --> 01:13:48.012
In disagreeing among themselves, they departed after Paul had made one statement.

01:13:48.632 --> 01:13:59.652
The Holy Spirit was right in saying to your fathers through Isaiah the prophet, go to this people and say, you will indeed hear but never understand, and you will indeed see but never perceive.

01:13:59.652 --> 01:14:12.132
For this people's heart has grown dull, and with their ears they can barely hear, and their eyes they have closed, lest they should see with their eyes and hear with their ears, and understand with their heart, and turn and I would heal them.

01:14:12.992 --> 01:14:18.392
So, this is the very end of Acts where Paul is speaking to a group of Jews.

01:14:18.392 --> 01:14:20.712
Next thing he does is say, I'm going to go to the nations.

01:14:20.712 --> 01:14:26.712
I'm going to the people that all these other changes are excluding and saying the gospel is not for us.

01:14:26.712 --> 01:14:28.252
I'm going to go to them instead.

01:14:28.252 --> 01:14:32.812
You're as evil as all your fathers who are murdering the prophets, who murdered Christ.

01:14:32.812 --> 01:14:37.952
I'm going to people who are actually going to believe what God says, as he has sent me.

01:14:37.952 --> 01:14:47.132
The key line is for this people's heart has grown dull, and their eyes have closed, lest they should see, and I would heal them.

01:14:47.132 --> 01:14:54.192
Now, what's present in the rabbinic is crucially different because the imperatives are changed.

01:14:54.192 --> 01:15:00.892
What is said in the rabbinic text is, make the heart of this people dull and shut their eyes.

01:15:00.892 --> 01:15:03.232
Do you see what just happened here?

01:15:03.232 --> 01:15:14.852
Acts and Matthew, when they quote Septuagint's Isaiah, it's a lamentation from God that their heart has grown cold, that their ears can barely hear, their eyes have closed.

01:15:14.852 --> 01:15:19.132
When the rabbinic texts make these changes, it blames God.

01:15:19.132 --> 01:15:23.392
It says that God make the heart of this people dull.

01:15:23.392 --> 01:15:25.392
God shut their eyes.

01:15:25.392 --> 01:15:27.252
They're saying they're not guilty at all.

01:15:27.252 --> 01:15:28.752
God did this to them.

01:15:28.752 --> 01:15:30.552
It's a wicked change.

01:15:30.552 --> 01:15:35.252
So some of these, as we said earlier, some are going to be neutral examples where it's just different wording.

01:15:35.652 --> 01:15:49.672
Some of them are evil, which is in distinct difference from what we had with the seven examples where in some cases they made even more sense in the Septuagint, which in no way diminishes what's in the New Testament.

01:15:49.672 --> 01:15:53.812
But we're not dealing with the same substance of the changes.

01:15:53.812 --> 01:16:06.132
The heart of these changes are malicious, whereas the heart of the difference between the Septuagint and the Hebrew forelog is pure, and it is entirely innocent and truthful.

01:16:06.132 --> 01:16:07.972
This is not a small deal.

01:16:07.972 --> 01:16:14.392
I didn't count up how many of these examples have, but just reading this makes me angry, because this is us that they're hating.

01:16:14.392 --> 01:16:16.612
This is God that they're hating.

01:16:16.612 --> 01:16:19.832
They tampered with his word and passed off a forgery.

01:16:22.532 --> 01:16:29.292
The next example is egregious, as egregious as the last, but in a slightly different way.

01:16:31.032 --> 01:16:36.872
And this one is Matthew 15, 8-9, citing to Isaiah 29, 13.

01:16:36.872 --> 01:16:41.032
This people honors me with their lips, but their heart is far from me.

01:16:41.032 --> 01:16:46.112
In vain do they worship me, teaching as doctrines the commandments of men.

01:16:46.112 --> 01:16:55.072
And so, in relevant part for the difference here in the Septuagint, in vain do they worship me, teaching human precepts and teachings.

01:16:55.072 --> 01:17:00.952
That's the same statement, slightly different wording, but the exact same teaching.

01:17:00.952 --> 01:17:06.632
The Rabbinic text and their fear of me is a commandment taught by men.

01:17:07.792 --> 01:17:26.012
Even if one were inclined to be as charitable as possible and sort of try to exegete away what this actually says, there's no real way to do that without simply ignoring what it says because what it says is wrong.

01:17:27.432 --> 01:17:30.912
The fear of God is not a commandment taught by men.

01:17:30.912 --> 01:17:34.952
The fear of God is what we are supposed to have as Christians.

01:17:34.952 --> 01:17:38.452
The fear of God is part of what it means to be a Christian.

01:17:38.452 --> 01:17:43.232
And here they're saying, their fear of me is a commandment taught by men.

01:17:43.232 --> 01:17:54.952
They've totally gotten rid of the condemnation of what they are doing because in vain do they worship me teaching human precepts and teachings as doctrines, the commandments of men.

01:17:56.152 --> 01:17:58.752
Because that's exactly what the rabbis did.

01:17:58.752 --> 01:18:00.992
The rabbis made their own religion.

01:18:00.992 --> 01:18:03.512
It's one of the things at which the Pharisees excelled.

01:18:03.512 --> 01:18:07.732
They made their own religion and implemented that contrary to God's law.

01:18:07.732 --> 01:18:16.372
And of course the ultimate display of that, the ultimate flower of that particular poisonous plant is the Talmud.

01:18:16.372 --> 01:18:17.772
This is a condemnation of that.

01:18:17.772 --> 01:18:19.992
It's a condemnation of all false religion, of course.

01:18:20.712 --> 01:18:31.672
But here, they do away with what God is condemning their own behavior and add something that is totally contrary to the core of the Christian religion.

01:18:31.672 --> 01:18:34.792
Because the fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom.

01:18:34.792 --> 01:18:39.552
The fear of the Lord is one of the ways in which we chiefly worship the Lord.

01:18:39.552 --> 01:18:44.912
It's not, as some may think when they hear it in English, fear in the sense of just being terrified of God.

01:18:44.912 --> 01:18:50.092
It is a different, fuller theological sense of that term, a discussion for another time.

01:18:50.092 --> 01:18:53.072
We've touched on it elsewhere, of course.

01:18:53.072 --> 01:18:57.112
But what they're saying here is simply contrary to the truth.

01:18:57.112 --> 01:19:03.032
We sort of gloss over this because that's the case in many places in the Old Testament where the rabbis have corrupted it.

01:19:03.032 --> 01:19:07.632
We just sort of try to harmonize it with what we know is Christian.

01:19:07.632 --> 01:19:08.652
We should have never done that.

01:19:08.652 --> 01:19:12.792
We should have certainly stopped doing that centuries ago, because here we have the Septuagint.

01:19:12.792 --> 01:19:13.892
There's nothing inconsistent.

01:19:13.972 --> 01:19:19.212
It's the same statement because Matthew is reading and citing to the Greek.

01:19:19.212 --> 01:19:25.152
He is not reading and citing to this corrupted text that the rabbis passed off.

01:19:25.152 --> 01:19:30.092
This text, they probably hadn't even created yet when Matthew was writing his gospel.

01:19:31.732 --> 01:19:35.972
And so, they just straight up deleted, in vain do they worship me, which really proves the point.

01:19:37.732 --> 01:19:44.052
The next example is from Matthew 19 verses 5 and 6, which quotes Genesis 2.24.

01:19:44.052 --> 01:19:47.532
This is also present in Mark 10.8.

01:19:47.532 --> 01:19:55.632
Matthew says, For this reason a man shall leave father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh.

01:19:55.632 --> 01:19:58.632
The ending here in the rabbinic text is the different part.

01:19:58.632 --> 01:20:03.932
The Septuagint says verbatim with Matthew, and the two shall become one flesh.

01:20:03.932 --> 01:20:08.452
Whereas the rabbinic text says, and become one flesh.

01:20:08.452 --> 01:20:15.012
So, two is missing entirely, and the they that you will see in some of your Bibles is interpolation.

01:20:15.012 --> 01:20:16.392
It's not present at all.

01:20:16.392 --> 01:20:23.152
So, it's very clearly a case where the same sentiment is being conveyed, but the wording is specifically distinct.

01:20:23.152 --> 01:20:29.272
And in the case of Matthew and Mark, they're quoting a word that they can only have possibly gotten from the Septuagint.

01:20:31.952 --> 01:20:41.252
The next example is in a similar vein, although with a theological nuance here, as opposed to what is more a change in diction.

01:20:41.252 --> 01:20:45.912
This is from Matthew 21, 16, citing to Psalm 8, 2.

01:20:45.912 --> 01:20:49.072
And they said to him, Do you hear what these are saying?

01:20:49.072 --> 01:20:52.452
And Jesus said to them, Yes, have you never read?

01:20:52.452 --> 01:20:56.072
Out of the mouth of infants and nursing babies you have prepared praise.

01:20:57.172 --> 01:21:05.512
And then from the Septuagint, Out of the mouths of infants and nurslings, the same word there, you furnished praise for yourself.

01:21:05.512 --> 01:21:12.652
As opposed to the Rabbinic text, which instead of furnished praise, prepared praise, has established strength.

01:21:14.192 --> 01:21:21.912
This is a different saying, and it's not really even coherent, because furnished praise makes perfect sense.

01:21:21.912 --> 01:21:35.732
Now, of course, we're going to, if we follow down that road, we don't get into doctrinal and theological differences here between different Christian sects today, because we view infants and infant faith differently, but it's very clear what is being said here.

01:21:35.732 --> 01:21:41.552
Prepared praise, furnished praise, whichever way you happen to translate that, is not the same as established strength.

01:21:41.552 --> 01:21:46.612
And so, again, it is very clear, Matthew is reading and citing to the Greek.

01:21:46.612 --> 01:21:50.672
He is not using any supposed Hebrew text.

01:21:50.672 --> 01:21:53.852
He is not using the Rabbinic text that we have in our Old Testament.

01:21:54.392 --> 01:21:56.032
He is using the Septuagint.

01:21:58.132 --> 01:22:06.092
The last of our 12 examples from Matthew is chapter 24 verse 29, which is quoting Isaiah 34 for.

01:22:06.092 --> 01:22:11.352
This is Jesus prophesying and Isaiah prophesying the end of the world.

01:22:11.352 --> 01:22:22.092
Isaiah and Matthew reads basically identically, The sun will be darkened and the moon will not give its light, and the stars will fall from the heaven, and the powers of the heavens will be shaken.

01:22:23.232 --> 01:22:35.072
The Septuagint difference here between the Rabbinic text, the Septuagint says that the stars will fall like a leaf, whereas the Rabbinic text says that the stars will wither and fade.

01:22:35.072 --> 01:22:48.152
So in this case, it's poetic, they're both describing the same type of thing, but the very specific wording of falling like a leaf versus withering, fading very clearly can only possibly have come from the Septuagint.

01:22:50.652 --> 01:23:01.232
The next example is from the Book of Luke, Luke 2.23, citing to Exodus 13.12, and so Luke 2.23.

01:23:01.232 --> 01:23:07.532
As it is written in the law of the Lord, every male who first opens the womb shall be called holy to the Lord.

01:23:07.532 --> 01:23:09.492
Now, it's worth focusing on that word male here.

01:23:09.492 --> 01:23:35.412
This is a relatively minor difference, but it just goes to show that there are problems with the Rabbinic text, and with regard to God's word, we shouldn't be encountering things like this, because we all know, at least we should know, in the Old Testament ceremonial system, males that opened the womb had to be redeemed, or if they were animals, redeemed or sacrificed to the Lord.

01:23:36.512 --> 01:23:49.932
This should be very clear in the text, and it is indeed very clear in the Septuagint, because in the Septuagint, you shall also set apart everything opening the womb, the males, for the Lord.

01:23:49.932 --> 01:23:59.692
Everything opening the womb from the herds or among your animals, whatever belongs to you, you shall consecrate the males to the Lord.

01:23:59.692 --> 01:24:11.052
We don't have that in the Rabbinic text, and the Old Testament that most of us have, so the ESV, follows this problem that is present in the Rabbinic text.

01:24:11.052 --> 01:24:14.532
It says you shall set apart to the Lord all that first opens the womb.

01:24:15.732 --> 01:24:25.532
It doesn't say the males, which is very key here, because when you look at the ceremonial system in the Old Testament, the females are not included.

01:24:25.532 --> 01:24:36.172
It is the male that first opens the womb that must be redeemed, and that is true of certain animals and certainly of your sons, not the females.

01:24:36.172 --> 01:24:42.672
It then says, with regard to animals, all the firstborn of your animals that are males shall be the Lord.

01:24:42.792 --> 01:24:55.432
So it has the phrase there, the males, that modifier, with regard to the animals, but it is absent with regard to the first statement there, all that first opens the womb.

01:24:55.432 --> 01:24:59.832
It seems like something minor, but it is not contrary to.

01:24:59.832 --> 01:25:14.272
It requires you to pull in context from elsewhere in scripture, whereas what is cited here in the New Testament matches the Septuagint because the Septuagint retains the accuracy of the males must be redeemed.

01:25:14.272 --> 01:25:20.132
It is not just everything that first opens the womb, it is specifically the males.

01:25:22.772 --> 01:25:31.952
The next example is from Luke 3 verses 4 through 6, which are quoting Isaiah 40 verses 3 through 5.

01:25:31.952 --> 01:25:40.112
For time, I'm just going to quote verse 4 from Isaiah and verse 5 from Luke, because that's really where the change is.

01:25:40.112 --> 01:25:45.692
Luke reads, Every valley shall be filled, and every mountain that is a hill shall be made low.

01:25:45.692 --> 01:25:50.572
Which is pretty much verbatim what we find in the Septuagint.

01:25:50.572 --> 01:25:57.712
What is said in the Rabbinic text is, Every valley shall be lifted up, every mountain and hill shall be made low.

01:25:57.712 --> 01:26:03.452
So the distinction there is between shall be filled versus shall be lifted up.

01:26:03.452 --> 01:26:10.012
And, you know, again, I don't know if this is one of those Shemitic sayings that makes sense to them and doesn't make sense to us.

01:26:10.012 --> 01:26:18.292
The important part is that Luke is very clearly quoting this specific wording of the Septuagint again for Isaiah here.

01:26:20.112 --> 01:26:23.012
And this is of course parallel to something that we went over earlier.

01:26:23.012 --> 01:26:27.072
And so the comments made earlier also apply here.

01:26:27.072 --> 01:26:37.152
The next example and the final example from Luke is Luke 4, 18 through 19, citing to Isaiah 61, 1 through 2.

01:26:37.152 --> 01:26:42.652
The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he has anointed me to proclaim good news to the poor.

01:26:42.652 --> 01:26:53.812
He has sent me to proclaim liberty to the captives, and recovering of sight to the blind, to set at liberty those who are repressed, to proclaim the year of the Lord's favor.

01:26:53.812 --> 01:27:02.452
There are a number of things in there that Christians will immediately note, but one particularly salient one is of course recovering of sight to the blind.

01:27:02.452 --> 01:27:04.872
Because that was a major part of Christ's ministry.

01:27:04.872 --> 01:27:07.032
There's all sorts of typology and theology.

01:27:07.032 --> 01:27:16.552
We can pull out of that for another time, but that was a major part of Christ's ministry on earth, was restoring sight to the blind.

01:27:16.552 --> 01:27:18.532
And so what does the Septuagint have?

01:27:18.532 --> 01:27:20.412
And recovery of sight to the blind.

01:27:20.412 --> 01:27:23.252
It is the exact same statement.

01:27:23.252 --> 01:27:25.812
What does the Rabbinic text have?

01:27:26.492 --> 01:27:29.972
And the opening of the prison to those who are bound.

01:27:29.972 --> 01:27:35.752
Or in the translation that the Jews prefer, the JPS, liberation to the imprisoned.

01:27:37.672 --> 01:27:43.452
This is a deliberate removal of part of Christ's ministry.

01:27:43.452 --> 01:27:45.992
The Septuagint has it word for word.

01:27:45.992 --> 01:27:49.112
It is exactly what we see cited here by Luke.

01:27:49.112 --> 01:27:52.692
It is exactly what we see happening in Christ's ministry.

01:27:52.692 --> 01:27:54.132
And the rabbis simply removed it.

01:27:55.172 --> 01:28:00.212
This is of course one of the themes that we see from the rabbis, from the rabbinical changes.

01:28:00.212 --> 01:28:04.152
They remove promises to the nations, which is to say non-Jews.

01:28:04.152 --> 01:28:06.912
They remove parts of Christ's ministry.

01:28:06.912 --> 01:28:10.612
They remove things that clearly reference Christ.

01:28:10.612 --> 01:28:12.232
There's a theme here.

01:28:12.232 --> 01:28:19.792
But again, the overarching point, this matches the Greek because Luke is reading the Greek.

01:28:20.252 --> 01:28:23.412
He is citing the Greek because the Greek is scripture.

01:28:25.272 --> 01:28:30.792
And in the same passage, Luke is also quoting Isaiah 61, 1, and 2.

01:28:30.792 --> 01:28:41.072
And the phrase that is different there is to set at liberty those who are oppressed, which is verbatim from the Septuagint and is not found in the rabbinic text.

01:28:43.012 --> 01:28:47.112
The next example is John 12, 38, citing to Isaiah 53, 1.

01:28:48.352 --> 01:28:51.912
So that the word spoken by the prophet Isaiah might be fulfilled.

01:28:51.912 --> 01:28:57.272
Lord, who has believed what he heard from us, and to whom has the arm of the Lord been revealed?

01:28:58.292 --> 01:29:03.892
This is one of those cases where it's worth dropping into the Greek, as it were, and simply looking at the two.

01:29:03.892 --> 01:29:08.852
The Nestle-Ilan versus the Sweet is what I happen to use.

01:29:08.852 --> 01:29:11.252
It's the exact same statement.

01:29:11.252 --> 01:29:13.132
Lord, who has believed what he heard from us?

01:29:13.932 --> 01:29:18.312
Curitis epistesen te acaue homon.

01:29:18.312 --> 01:29:19.472
It is the exact same.

01:29:19.472 --> 01:29:22.752
I know someone's going to complain about my Greek pronunciation.

01:29:22.752 --> 01:29:25.312
I'm not fluent in Greek, too bad.

01:29:25.312 --> 01:29:29.392
The point is that it is the exact same statement.

01:29:29.392 --> 01:29:34.012
Word for word, identical between the New Testament and the Old Testament.

01:29:36.812 --> 01:29:44.752
This is a case where very clearly what is being cited here again is the Greek, in Greek notably.

01:29:44.752 --> 01:29:47.132
It's kind of easy to do that.

01:29:47.132 --> 01:29:52.512
This would rise to the level of what we would call in modern English a quote.

01:29:52.512 --> 01:29:55.412
John is quoting the Septuagint.

01:29:57.832 --> 01:30:05.212
And crucially, the first word there, Lord, is deleted from the Repenic text, which is how we know, beyond any shadow of doubt, it's a quote.

01:30:05.212 --> 01:30:14.992
Not only is it verbatim, but the word Lord, Kyrie, not Yahweh, blasphemous sound, that the rabbis deleted.

01:30:14.992 --> 01:30:21.192
And this is also one, just John 12, 38, is also repeated in Romans 10, 16.

01:30:21.192 --> 01:30:26.752
So we're not double counting it, but it shows up a couple times, the same verse in Isaiah.

01:30:26.752 --> 01:30:29.832
The next example we have is from Acts 2, 26.

01:30:31.252 --> 01:30:42.612
And this is a case which is quoting in, now that we're getting into some Psalms here in this one, the Psalm numbering is different in the Septuagint, which is the pain in the butt.

01:30:42.612 --> 01:30:51.692
For most of the Psalms, after about 10 and before someplace, you have to delete, you have to subtract one in order to find the correct Psalm.

01:30:51.692 --> 01:30:57.792
So in your Bible, it's going to be Psalm 16, 9, in the Septuagint, it's going to be 15, 9.

01:30:57.792 --> 01:31:02.052
Acts 2, 26 says, therefore my heart was glad and my tongue rejoiced.

01:31:02.052 --> 01:31:15.772
The Septuagint says again, my tongue rejoiced, whereas the Rabbinic text says, my glory rejoices, which is one of those cases where A, it's not remotely the same word, it can't possibly be a mistranslation.

01:31:15.892 --> 01:31:18.072
B, it doesn't really makes any sense.

01:31:18.072 --> 01:31:20.112
What is it for your glory to be rejoicing?

01:31:20.112 --> 01:31:29.052
Now, I don't know if this is Rabbinic tampering in this case, but it's very clearly, I believe this is Peter speaking in Acts 2, quoting the Septuagint.

01:31:31.692 --> 01:31:41.772
The next example, again, still in the Book of Acts, is chapter 7 verse 14, citing to Genesis 46, 27 and Exodus 1, 5.

01:31:41.772 --> 01:31:48.072
And Joseph sent and summoned Jacob his father and all his kindred, seventy-five persons in all.

01:31:48.072 --> 01:31:51.252
The Septuagint has seventy-five persons.

01:31:51.252 --> 01:31:53.812
The Rabbinic text has seventy persons.

01:31:55.872 --> 01:32:04.672
This is a relatively minor difference in terms of, perhaps, characters, but it is a salient difference, because we do have a different number here.

01:32:04.672 --> 01:32:13.112
And so, if you have the New Testament author citing something, he is going to cite the number in that thing.

01:32:13.112 --> 01:32:21.472
And so, he's very clearly here citing the Septuagint, which has seventy-five, which is what he cites, not seventy, which is present in the Rabbinic.

01:32:24.272 --> 01:32:33.152
The next example from Acts is one that we've mentioned before, and it's one of the very first ones that made me wonder what was going on with the Septuagint thing.

01:32:33.152 --> 01:32:39.552
This is Acts 7, 42 and 43, which is quoting Amos 5, 25 through 27.

01:32:39.552 --> 01:32:48.232
I'm going to read the full thing from Acts, as I said earlier, and then we're just going to show you the bits that are different, because the context here is, again, very interesting.

01:32:50.252 --> 01:32:57.932
But God turned away and gave them over to the worship of the host of heaven, as it is written in the Book of the Prophets.

01:32:57.932 --> 01:33:04.392
Did you bring to me slain beasts and sacrifices during the forty years in the wilderness, O house of Israel?

01:33:04.392 --> 01:33:14.352
You took up the tent of Moloch and the star of your god, Yerufban, or Remfan, the images that you worship, and I will send you into exile beyond Babylon.

01:33:15.392 --> 01:33:30.052
So this is Stephen directly condemning the Jews to their faces for having murdered Christ, and he says you were worshiping your god Moloch and the star of your god Remfan in the forty years when you were wandering in the wilderness.

01:33:30.052 --> 01:33:41.012
Now I alluded to this in the previous episode talking about King Job and why he might have had reasons beyond just fear to keep these people out of his territory.

01:33:41.012 --> 01:33:44.452
They were literally worshiping Moloch in the desert.

01:33:44.452 --> 01:33:46.312
That's what Acts says.

01:33:46.312 --> 01:33:47.372
That's what Stephen says.

01:33:47.372 --> 01:33:48.912
That's what the Holy Ghost says.

01:33:48.912 --> 01:33:50.992
That's what Amos says.

01:33:50.992 --> 01:33:59.412
So the difference here is Moloch and Remfan, which are both words that we use frequently today.

01:33:59.412 --> 01:34:02.532
Certainly on the internet and on the right, we're familiar with this.

01:34:03.472 --> 01:34:08.232
This is a distinction where Stephen, the martyr, they kill him immediately after this.

01:34:08.232 --> 01:34:12.612
This is one of the very last things he says before they get outraged and murder him on the spot.

01:34:12.612 --> 01:34:22.372
For calling them Moloch worshippers, for saying that they were worshiping the star of their god, Remfan, in the desert during the 40 years in the wilderness.

01:34:22.372 --> 01:34:27.212
What is said in the Rabbinic text is totally different.

01:34:27.212 --> 01:34:29.232
Doesn't say Moloch and it doesn't say Remfan.

01:34:29.812 --> 01:34:35.972
It says Sekuth your king and Eun instead of Remfan.

01:34:35.972 --> 01:34:39.912
Now these are both proper names, but I'm not aware of them showing up anywhere else.

01:34:39.912 --> 01:34:41.072
For our purposes, it doesn't matter.

01:34:41.072 --> 01:34:44.872
We don't need to do any sort of archaeological investigation.

01:34:44.872 --> 01:35:05.692
Scripture says Moloch and Remfan says that they're worshipping the star of their god in the desert, and there were no stars associated with the people of Israel, so called, until fairly recently, but a thousand years ago, the star started showing up on black magic tomes and later they said, oh, this is the star of David.

01:35:05.692 --> 01:35:07.192
It's the star of Remfan.

01:35:07.192 --> 01:35:09.112
It's the star in Acts.

01:35:09.112 --> 01:35:10.872
It's the star in Amos.

01:35:10.872 --> 01:35:13.872
But it's only there if you read the Septuagint.

01:35:14.432 --> 01:35:19.612
You would never know that this correlation existed if you believe the rabbinic text.

01:35:22.112 --> 01:35:33.192
The next example still in the Book of Acts, the next chapter, chapter 8 verses 32 through 33, citing to Isaiah again, chapter 53 verses 7 through 8.

01:35:33.192 --> 01:35:43.612
Now the passage of the scripture that he was reading was this, like a sheep he was led to the slaughter, and like a lamb before its shearer is silent, so he opens not his mouth.

01:35:43.612 --> 01:35:46.592
In his humiliation, justice was denied him.

01:35:46.592 --> 01:35:51.572
Who can describe his generation, for his life is taken away from the earth.

01:35:52.652 --> 01:35:59.892
There are a number of differences between what is cited here in the New Testament and the rabbinic text.

01:35:59.892 --> 01:36:03.192
With regard to the Septuagint, it is essentially a perfect match.

01:36:03.192 --> 01:36:13.692
It is very clearly what is being read, what is being cited here, which incidentally does mean the eunuch is indeed reading the Greek.

01:36:13.692 --> 01:36:16.332
He is reading the Septuagint.

01:36:16.332 --> 01:36:22.812
This is also what is used, of course, by the apostles, by everyone in this day, because that is just what they were reading.

01:36:22.812 --> 01:36:26.092
That was their Old Testament.

01:36:26.092 --> 01:36:44.772
Weirdly, the words sheep and lamb are swapped in the rabbinic, and you will note that if you read the version of the Old Testament, you probably have that is probably based on the rabbinic, more likely than not, but saliently another thing that they removed from their version is the word humiliation.

01:36:45.792 --> 01:36:48.672
They simply decided, well, we don't need that.

01:36:48.672 --> 01:36:50.472
We don't need to have that word there.

01:36:50.472 --> 01:36:59.992
And so some of your Old Testaments may have that if they decided to pull from the Septuagint to harmonize with the New Testament.

01:37:00.712 --> 01:37:08.892
But if you read that in just the rabbinic text, you are not going to have that humiliation there.

01:37:08.892 --> 01:37:12.032
You are going to have something else.

01:37:15.112 --> 01:37:21.472
The next example is from Acts 13 41, which is quoting Habakkuk 1 5.

01:37:23.472 --> 01:37:32.512
Acts reads, look you scoffers, be astounded and perish, for I am doing a work in your days, a work that you will not believe, even if one tells it to you.

01:37:34.392 --> 01:37:45.532
The rabbinic text changes from look you scoffers and perish to look among the nations and see wonder and be astounded.

01:37:45.532 --> 01:37:50.172
So scoffers disappears and perish disappears.

01:37:50.172 --> 01:37:55.612
Calling them scoffers, the rabbis got rid of, and saying that they would perish is eliminated.

01:37:55.612 --> 01:38:15.712
So again, these prophecies, including from the minor prophets at the very end of, you know, before Israel had the promise fulfilled and the Christ with the destruction of the temple and everything else, some of the very last prophecies calling them scoffers and saying they would perish, they had to clean that up on their way out the door.

01:38:17.092 --> 01:38:27.792
The final example we have then is from the Book of Acts still, Acts 15, 16-18, the final example for this episode, that is, citing to Amos 9, 11-12.

01:38:29.292 --> 01:38:33.692
After this I will return and I will rebuild the tent of David that has fallen.

01:38:33.692 --> 01:38:40.052
I will rebuild its ruins and I will restore it, that the remnant of mankind may seek the Lord.

01:38:40.052 --> 01:38:46.152
And all the nations who are called by my name, says the Lord, who makes these things known from of old.

01:38:46.152 --> 01:38:50.152
Again, I changed the little word play there to be friendly.

01:38:50.612 --> 01:38:55.192
That the ESV uses, I changed the Gentiles to the nations as it should be.

01:38:55.192 --> 01:38:58.812
And so the Septuagint again just matches this.

01:38:58.812 --> 01:39:06.272
So that the remnant of mankind and all the nations upon whom my name is invoked will search for me.

01:39:06.272 --> 01:39:13.132
We've mentioned this one previously because this is the sort of change of which the rabbis were certainly fond.

01:39:13.132 --> 01:39:16.532
They did something similar pervasively in the Book of Esther.

01:39:17.092 --> 01:39:32.672
And so, instead of having the remnant of mankind and the nations upon whom my name is invoked, they have that they may possess the remnant of Edom and all the nations upon whom my name is called.

01:39:32.672 --> 01:39:51.512
They change this from a prophecy about what God is going to do for the nations about the fact that the Gospel is going to be taken to all peoples into basically a revenge fantasy against Edom, against their old racial enemies, notably their very close cousins, but their racial enemies.

01:39:53.212 --> 01:39:58.992
This is not even remotely comparable to what we have in the Rabbinic text.

01:39:58.992 --> 01:40:02.852
The Septuagint matches because the Septuagint is what is being cited here.

01:40:02.852 --> 01:40:11.952
And so, the promise to the nations remains in the Septuagint, whereas the rabbis again transformed it into this revenge fantasy.

01:40:13.572 --> 01:40:24.032
And so, to close out this episode, you can very clearly see here, just by the preponderance of the evidence, what do you have?

01:40:24.032 --> 01:40:32.752
You have citations by the New Testament authors to the Old Testament in Greek, to the Septuagint, because that is their Old Testament.

01:40:33.452 --> 01:40:44.892
Yes, we had at the beginning that handful of, in some cases, very nitpicky examples, in which they were citing to a Hebrew four-laga that maybe had been preserved via the Aramaic Targums.

01:40:44.892 --> 01:40:52.132
However, that had been preserved, perhaps liturgically, or just miraculously, in the case of the Spirit directly inspiring them, perhaps.

01:40:52.132 --> 01:40:55.612
We don't know exactly how that transpired.

01:40:55.612 --> 01:40:59.152
But we do know that those are the exceptions.

01:41:00.432 --> 01:41:12.032
Virtually always, when the New Testament authors cite to the Old Testament, when they reference the Old Testament, in some cases, when they literally quote it word for word, they are doing that in the Greek.

01:41:12.032 --> 01:41:19.772
Because the Greek is what they were reading, the Greek is what they knew, the Greek was their Bible, and it should be our Bible.

01:41:19.772 --> 01:41:22.292
Because the Greek is the one that God preserved.

01:41:22.292 --> 01:41:31.812
I'm not going to do the full conclusion for the series today, obviously, because that will come at the end of the next episode, when we've finished going through the examples.

01:41:31.812 --> 01:41:42.052
Notably the next episode will simply be examples where the citations in the New Testament are to the Septuagint.

01:41:42.052 --> 01:41:48.052
Because we're done with the exceptions, we went over all of them in that tiny segment at the beginning of this episode.

01:41:48.052 --> 01:41:53.632
Everywhere else, where the New Testament cites to the Old Testament, the authors are citing to the Greek.

01:41:54.552 --> 01:42:04.512
They are putting their stamp of approval because they are putting God's stamp of approval on the Old Testament, in the Greek, on the Septuagint.

01:42:04.512 --> 01:42:13.612
If we believe the New Testament, which certainly, if we are Christians, we must, because if we do not believe the New Testament, then we are certainly not Christians.

01:42:13.612 --> 01:42:31.432
And so, given that we are Christians, given that we believe the New Testament is inspired, and given that the New Testament cites to the Greek, we must believe that they are citing to that which is inspired, that which is God's Word, because they are citing it as God's Word.

01:42:31.432 --> 01:42:40.232
This is notably different from the times, very few in number, incidentally, where New Testament authors cite something external to Scripture.

01:42:40.232 --> 01:42:43.692
You have some citations to poetry and some minor things like that.

01:42:43.692 --> 01:42:45.632
They are not citing those as Scripture.

01:42:45.632 --> 01:42:48.292
They're not quoting those as the Word of God.

01:42:48.292 --> 01:42:53.692
Here, many of these are introduced as, it is written, it is written in the Prophet.

01:42:53.692 --> 01:43:03.592
God said, they are giving a deliberate and explicit stamp of approval to the Old Testament in the Greek.

01:43:03.592 --> 01:43:10.192
Because it is the Word of God, it is the Bible of the Church, it should never have fallen out of use.

01:43:10.192 --> 01:43:17.892
It is unforgivable, it is unconscionable, that our ancestors permitted essentially the Old Testament to be lost.

01:43:18.572 --> 01:43:24.752
Now, yes, of course, God preserved us from our own stupidity, as he does day by day, thankfully.

01:43:24.752 --> 01:43:31.332
He preserved his word because the Hebrew contains some of the Word of God.

01:43:31.332 --> 01:43:34.952
But the Greek is the Word of God, and we had it all along.

01:43:34.952 --> 01:43:42.692
It is equivalent, and I pointed this out before, it is equivalent to when the Old Testament Israelites lost the Old Testament in a wall.

01:43:43.792 --> 01:43:47.932
We did it in the Vatican Archives or wherever it happens to be.

01:43:47.932 --> 01:43:49.872
We did the equivalent.

01:43:49.872 --> 01:43:56.652
We pretended that we had the Old Testament still in this thing that the rabbis gave to us, but it was not the Old Testament.

01:43:56.652 --> 01:44:04.612
It is not the Old Testament as preserved by God, and as clearly taught by the New Testament.

01:44:04.612 --> 01:44:18.612
And we will continue to prove that in the next episode in which we will give even more examples of where the New Testament authors are very clearly citing the Greek.

01:44:18.612 --> 01:44:20.432
Because they were reading the Greek.

01:44:20.432 --> 01:44:24.692
Because again, as we proved in earlier episodes, they didn't even read Hebrew.

01:44:24.692 --> 01:44:26.652
They didn't have access to the Hebrew.

01:44:26.652 --> 01:44:34.572
The Hebrew didn't exist, because the Hebrew by this point was dead and gone and lost for all time.

01:44:34.572 --> 01:44:39.152
The Greek is what God preserved, because the Greek fulfills God's promises.

01:44:40.152 --> 01:44:41.632
The Greek is his word.

01:44:41.632 --> 01:44:45.272
The Greek is what we should be using as his word.

01:44:45.272 --> 01:44:52.272
We should be thankful that God preserved it down through the centuries, despite our negligence.

01:44:52.272 --> 01:44:59.512
We should not be using what the Christ-killing rabbis passed off to us as supposedly God's word.

01:44:59.512 --> 01:45:05.572
We can see where they changed it, and we can see the kind of changes they made because they follow a theme.

01:45:05.572 --> 01:45:07.992
It is exactly what we would expect them to do.

01:45:08.872 --> 01:45:11.112
And it is exactly what they did.

01:45:11.112 --> 01:45:13.652
Whereas the Greek is faithful.

01:45:13.652 --> 01:45:19.672
The Greek was preserved because God's promises ride alongside the Greek.

01:45:19.672 --> 01:45:24.252
That is how he fulfilled his promises that his word would endure.

01:45:24.252 --> 01:45:34.532
And again, thankfully, he did that for us despite our own stupidity and negligence and faithlessness down through the centuries.

01:45:34.532 --> 01:45:36.192
We still have the Greek.

01:45:36.192 --> 01:45:37.412
We should be using the Greek.

01:45:37.972 --> 01:45:43.872
We should no longer be using the Rabbinic text because it is demonstrably corrupted.

01:45:43.872 --> 01:45:46.072
It is not the text of the early church.

01:45:46.072 --> 01:45:48.212
It is not the text of the apostles.

01:45:48.212 --> 01:45:51.192
It is not the text of Christ himself.

01:45:51.192 --> 01:45:52.492
That is the Greek.

01:45:52.492 --> 01:45:54.172
That is the Septuagint.

01:45:54.172 --> 01:45:56.092
That is the Bible of the church.