LXX (Hebrews 1:6) (F.Till)

• Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]

> TILL

> Here is another one to consider.  In Hebrews 1:6, the writer quoted

another

> scripture: "And let all the angels of God worship him."  This is a direct

> quotation from the Septuagint verse of Deuteronomy 32:43a, "Rejoice ye

> heavens, with him, and let all the angels of God worship him."  However,

it

> is not found in the Masoretic text, which reads like this: "Rejoice ye

> nations with his people; For he will avenge the blood of his servants,

and

> will render vengeance to his adversaries, and will make expiation for his

> land, for his people."

> 

> The Septuagint contains some of these statements, but reads very

> differently.  Most important, the quotation in Hebrews 1:6 about the

angels

> of God worshiping him is included in the Septuagint but is absent in the

> Masoretic.


MATT BELL
Here is what Floyd Ministries has to say on Hebrews 1:6. Let it be noted
that I am not citing him assuming he is correct, but simply testing the
weakness or strength of his arguments.

'The Epistle to the Hebrews includes three Old Testament quotations which
have caused much disagreement. The first of these is Hebrews 1:6:

And again, when he bringeth in the firstbegotten into the world, he saith,
And let all the angels of God worship him.

The underlined portion of the verse is the section about which the
"problem" revolves.  This clause is found in the uncial MS Vaticanus B
(which all scholars label as an LXX MS) as an addition to Deuteronomy
32:43.  On this sole basis, the author of the Epistle to the Hebrews has
repeatedly been accused of citing as Scripture a segment of a verse not
found in the Hebrew Bible.  The text of the Septuagint, however, is neither
definite nor incontrovertible with regard to this verse.  Manuscript
Alexandrinus A, another so-called Septuagint uncial (see p. 9), reads: "...
And let all the angels of God give them (Him) strength."

This latter reading was adopted by Alfred Rahlfs (1935), one of the most
recent editors of the LXX.  Rahlfs' is widely considered to be among the
best critical editions of the Septuagint – a standard.  As the late
conservative Christian text critic Edward F. Hills (d. 1981) has correctly
perceived, if the text of Codex A is correct as Rahlfs believes, then the
content of B must have been altered to agree with Hebrews 1:6, and the
author of the Epistle to the Hebrews could not be quoting it.  That is, the
scribe who wrote B would obviously, in that instance, have had the Epistle
to the Hebrews before him at a time after the Hebrew Epistle was written!

Moreover, the author of Heb. 1:6 was not citing Deu. 32:43 in the first
place!  The passage to which he was actually alluding was either Psalm
97:7, 103:20, 148:2, or Nehemiah 9:6c (or all four).  Thus, it becomes
painfully evident that the scribe who was writing Vaticanus B – long after
the Hebrew epistle was written – simply could not find any of these cross
references and added a portion of Heb. 1:6 to Deu. 32:43 in order to
provide the needed citation.  Actually, as Vaticanus B is merely a copy of
Origen's 5th column, it is Origen (or possibly Eusebius) who failed to find
the proper cross reference(s) and stands guilty of this modification.

Sadly, to this day nearly all versions of the Bible erroneously state in
the margin that Heb. 1:6 is a reference to Deu. 32:43 and that it has been
taken from the LXX.  In so doing, they assert that the Hebrew text is wrong
– that it is not the infallible Word of God but rather, it only "contains"
the Word of God.  Shame!'

What I would note is that even if you were correct is still only
establishes that which is already accepted - a BC Greek Pentateuch.

Thanks
Matt Bell

• Previous message: LXX (Hebrews 11:21)(Matt Bell)
• Next message: LXX (Hebrews 1:6) Origen produces corrupt KJV
• Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]