Video

So let's begin a cross-examination of *the Truth of the Septuagint:* *1/30 ― Matthew 13:15* “For this people’s heart *_is waxed_* gross, and their ears *_are dull of hearing,_* and *_their eyes they have closed;_* lest at any time they should see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and should understand with their heart, and should be converted, and I should heal them.” -KJV New Testament compared to *Isaiah 6:10* (LXX) “For the heart of this people *_has become_* gross, and their ears *_are dull of hearing,_* and *_their eyes have they closed;_* lest they should see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and understand with their heart, and be converted, and I should heal them.” -Brenton's 1851 along with *Isaiah 6:10* (Masoretic Text) *“Make the heart of this people* fat, *And make* their ears heavy, and *shut* their eyes; Lest they see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, And understand with their heart, and convert, and be healed.” - KJV Masoretic Text. Here the Masoretic Isaiah has the prophet telling God to "make the heart" and "make their ears" as opposed to both the LXX and Matthew where it is simply an exposition of the state of their ears and hearts. *Score: LXX = ONE // Masoretic Text = ZER0*

We can reasonably conclude that the narcissistic bias of your solipsistic presentation favors the revisionist propaganda of the crackpot Alexandrian cult on social media.

There was nothing to debate here. Dr. Stringer presented his research into the dubious historicity of the LXX, and his presentation is correct as to the pertinent facts. Moreover, no authoritative Septuagint can be found anywhere just as the brilliant Francis Turretin demonstrated centuries ago. All the Apostles of the Lord Jesus Christ understood Biblical Hebrew. They knew that the canon of the Old Testament was complete with the last word of Malachi, and none of them required any translation of it into Hellenistic Greek. The operation of the Holy Spirit is exposited conclusively in the Pauline epistles. "And God said, Let there be light: and there was light" (Genesis 1 :3). There is no reason at all to doubt any verse that is preserved in the infallible King James Bible today. Shalom aleichem!

The Book of Proverbs clearly explains that one side of an argument sounds good until the other side presents their case. There is MUCH to debate here. Silencing the opposition is tantamount to admitting failure to prove one's case. Moving on with the cross-examination. *2/30 ― Romans 9:27-28* “Esaias (Isaiah) also crieth concerning Israel, ‘Though the number of the children of Israel be as the sand of the sea, a remnant shall be saved: for he will finish the work, and cut it short in righteousness: because a short work will the Lord make upon the earth.” -KJV New Testament with *Isaiah 10:22-23* (LXX) “ ‘And though the people of Israel be as the sand of the sea, a remnant of them shall be saved. He will finish the work, and cut it short in righteousness: because the Lord will make a short work in all the world.” -Brenton's Septuagint 1851. and *Isaiah 10:22-23* (Masoretic Text) “For though thy people Israel be as the sand of the sea, Yet a remnant of them shall *return:* The consumption decreed shall overflow with righteousness. For the Lord God of hosts shall make a consumption, even determined, In the midst of all the land. ” -KJV Masoretic Text Again, based only on quotations from the New Testament compared with the LXX and Masoretic Text of the KJV, the LXX comes out of this match the winner. We're talking a near exact match. The KJV's own Old Testament fails the sniff test. *Score: LXX = TWO // Masoretic Text = ZER0*

Moving on with the cross-examination. *3/30 ― Romans 15:12* “And again Esaias saith, ‘There shall be a root of Jesse, *_and he that shall rise to reign over the Gentiles;_* in him shall *_the Gentiles trust.’ ”_* -KJV New Testament compared to *Isaiah 11:10* (LXX) “And in that day there shall be a root of Jesse, and he that shall arise to rule over the Gentiles; in him shall *_the Gentiles trust,_* and his rest shall be glorious.”-Brenton's Septuagint 1851 along with *Isaiah 11:10* (Masoretic Text) “And in that day there shall be a root of Jesse, *_Which shall stand for an ensign of the people;_* To it shall *_the Gentiles seek:_* And his rest shall be glorious.”-KJV Masoretic Text Again, the *Masoretic Text* is quite distorted here. Clearly the Hebrew requires an update based on the Greek Septuagint text and its cross examination by the New Testament. *Score: LXX = THREE // Masoretic Text = ZER0*

No, he does not realize such a falsehood. There was nothing to debate here. ερευνατε τας γραφας οτι υμεις δοκειτε εν αυταις ζωην αιωνιον εχειν και εκειναι εισιν αι μαρτυρουσαι περι εμου. Translated into perfect English, those Koine Greek words of the Lord Jesus Christ read: “Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me” (John 5: 39). Everlasting salvation from sin by grace through faith in the only-begotten Son of God because of His finished work on Calvary alone testifies of His eternal holiness. The KING of KINGS and LORD of LORDS is the Prince of Peace, and the Saviour averred the Hebrew Tanakh consistently as a documented matter of immutable fact. The matter at hand in Dr. Stringer’s edifying message is the purity of the Holy Scriptures, and his presentation about the historiography of the LXX is factually correct. Moreover, no authoritative Septuagint can be found anywhere just as the brilliant Francis Turretin documented centuries ago. Too many Alexandrian cultists have ignored their wholesome exegeses. Their denial is palpable, and the so-called modern versions just rehash the corrupted parchments of the revisionist “Critical Text.” The operation of the Holy Spirit is exposited conclusively in the Pauline epistles during this present dispensation of grace. These are perilous times indeed, and our adversary seeking whom he may devour knows that his time is short. The rapture of the Bride of Christ precedes the time of Jacob’s trouble, and the fulfillment of prophecy confirms the veracity of the Gospel over the millennia. For more details, please refer to Hebrews 4 : 12 and Mark 13 : 31 along with 2 Timothy 3 : 16 and Psalms 12 : 6-7 in the infallible King James Bible today.

Hey John. Welcome to the chat. Please note: @jjpetkusiii is a chat-bot. Its programming is designed to create distension and discord. I don't recommend paying it any mind. Having just read what it posted made me chuckle at how far off it was in responding to your post. The key to understanding this conundrum is that the Preface to the Reader (where we were told "the Apostles used the Septuagint") was removed from the Authorized version years ago. This was done along with the removal of 1) the _marginal notes & comments,_ along with 2) the so-called "Apocrypha" (the Deutero-canonical books). We're told these extra portions made printing the KJV too expensive (at some point in the 1800s). We are seeing the result of these errors. And yes, "Doctor" Stringer is well aware of the impact of the Preface to the Reader. But devotion to a single translation blinds the heart and mind. Darkness is a difficult thing to fight without the help of others. And the KJV Only camp is a small sect that prides itself on isolation. *The Facts* The Translators used a copy of the LXX. We know because these men departed from the MT (Masoretic Hebrew text) for the LXX (Greek Septuagint) in crucial places ("virgin" for "young woman", "they have pierced my hands and my feet", for "like a lion my hands and feet", etc.) Their KJV would have been burned had they not made these Greek-based modifications. Truth be told: *no one is as deaf as one who simply refuses to listen.* We have seen activists across so many venues focus on disruption, dissension and discord. This is what activists do. They're not known for _building._ But they do a wonderful job of _tearing down._ The LXX has been a rich blessing. The passages I find so refreshing are too numerous to post here. Translations such as _The New English Translation of the Septuagint_ (NETS), _The Orthodox Study Bible_ (OSB), _The Lexham English Septuagint_ (LES) along with Brenton's 1856 and Thomson's 1808 translations have added very much to my faith. May these translations (many can be found free online) encourage your faith. And don't fear the new wisdom books and history books you'll find.

No, "OfMice AndMen" a. k. a. " @@lavalleeverdun " et alia. You are wrong again by your own MickeyMouse admission. QED.

There was nothing to debate here. No offense is intended but you , "OfMice AndMen" a. k. a. "@@lavalleeverdun" et alia failed to tell us what your native tongue is other than a sloppy mouthpiece for your father the devil whereas we already understand that you are totally illiterate in Koine Greek and Biblical Hebrew. I have all the incontrovertible proof of the birth, ministry, crucifixion, death, burial and Resurrection of the Lord Jesus Christ, my Saviour forever, that I need. "And the scripture was fulfilled which saith, Abraham believed God, and it was imputed unto him for righteousness, and he was called the Friend of God" (James 2 : 23). The entire Old Testament was complete with the last word of Malachi. Dr. Stringer presented his research into the historiography of the LXX, and his presentation is factually correct. Moreover, no authoritative Septuagint can be found anywhere as the brilliant Francis Turretin demonstrated centuries ago. For more details, please refer to Hebrews 4 : 12 and Mark 13 :31 along with 2 Timothy 3 : 16 and Psalms 12 : 6-7 in the infallible King James Bible today. No further evidence of your toxic narcissism and hackneyed libels in English is warranted. QED.

There was nothing to debate here. Dr. Stringer presented his research into the dubious historicity of the LXX, and his presentation is correct as to the pertinent facts. The entire Old Testament in Biblical Hebrew was complete with the last verse of Malachi. The Lord Jesus Christ said, "Blessed are the pure in heart: for they shall see God" (Matt. 5 : 8). Moreover, no authoritative Septuagint can be found anywhere. For more details, please refer to Titus 3 : 5 along with 2 Peter 3 : 9-10 and Luke 16 : 19-31 in the New Testament of the infallible King James Bible.

Thanks!

Recommended: Neither Oldest nor Best: How the Foundational Manuscripts of Modern Bible Translations are Unreliable, by Dr. David A. Sorenson.

@@sdlorah6450Recommeneded: How We Got The Bible by Timothy Paul Jones

Preach!!! Amen!!

Are you new to this whole KJV-Only discussion?

*God is Free to Use What He Chooses* • You are using sophistry to prove a point. That's dishonest of you. No one questions whether New Testament writers cited passages from books, from expressions, from pagan sources. And whether any of these sources should be restored to the volume of the Books is up for debate, but that's not the debate at hand. So far, so good? Let's move on. • The Greek Septuagint isn't some pagan cult book of dark rituals. (You never said that directly, but I for one resent your implication that the Greek translation should be shoved into the same category as Pagan writers of Paul's day.) • The issue at hand is *_the fortifying of the ignorance of King James Onlyists._* KJV Onlyists are already low-information activists. Having their KJV handy plus Sam Gipp//Gail Ripplinger//Kent Hovind//and a host of other like-minded trolls at their disposal, they perceive themselves as defenders of the truth and scholars _par excellence!_ And nothing can be further from the truth. • The Greek Septuagint has been categorized as "a fairy tale" and "riddled with heresies" by some of the online community ― a position they cannot defend. Why use proof when slander and insult is just as effective _in the eyes of other Echo Chamber KJV Onlyists?_ • Of *course* God is free to cite anything He wishes. But hundreds of years before our glorious Messiah graced the earth, a Greek (common tongue) translation was created and disseminated among Jewish communities. This is the text that prepared the way for Paul's missions of proclamations of the Good News. • It's the very book the church leaders (often referred to as the Church Fathers) cited gratuitously. Their Scriptural references are either direct quotes from or strong paraphrases of that very Septuagint. Page after page, citation after citation, they used the very words quoted by Jesus and by Paul and the other Apostles. • Tell me. Which TR are you referring to? There are many editions of it. Some go so far as to add Greek text that reflects KJV's New Testament without a shred of textual support. Beza's book of Revelation has the phrase "who was, and is, and is to come" when all manuscripts read "who was and is, the holy one". Yes; I'm aware of this. • While KJV Onlyists used convoluted arguments to defend their position, folks around the world ask why American English Fundamentalists are the only ones in the world with God's Pure Words... and they don't have this in their translations. The biblical version of racism. • And while you rely on your sophistry to create a confusing mist of explanations, the scholarly community have gone over these arguments long ago. The comparison between the source Hebrew text underlying the KJV and the Greek Septuagint more-often-than-not has the Septuagint the clear winner as the source of apostolic and divine quotation. God didn't give his inspired authors make-up phrases as coming from the Old Testament purely out of make-believe inspiration. They were led by the Holy Spirit to cite passages from Scripture. They hid the word in their hearts. • The hypocrisy of those who defend the King James Authorized Bible is jarring. Truly jarring!! These people claim the Septuagint is a fairly tale. They claim the KJV is letter-perfect word of God. They claim it never needs a revision. They claim the Deutero-canonical books are not part of the cannon. *_Meanwhile_* these "apocryphal" books were sold with every king james bible since 1611, for over two hundred years. That's a tough one to wriggle out of. But you're free to try. *_Meanwhile_* the marginal references were removed from the text at the same time as the Apocrypha. Can you guess why? Ohhh, right! They had numerous cross references from the New Testament to the Apocrypha!! Now, ain't that embarrassing! *_Meanwhile_* the Preface to the Reader was torn from it's front pages as carelessly as the cross-references and Apocrypha ― a Preface that stated clearly that the Greek Septuagint was the word of God, and that this translation would itself require updates and future revisions as textual advancements would require. Isn't. That. Embarrassing. The Translators, whose minds were clear enough to pen the Perfect Word, oppose the modern Onlyist's radical and activist views. What a way to dishonor their legacy: to shame them by using sophistry and nothing else to defend an untenable position.

"Francis Turretin (1623-1687) was a significant figure in Reformed theology, known for his "Institutes of Elenctic Theology." He was a staunch opponent of Amyraldism and a defender of Calvinistic orthodoxy. His works have greatly influenced the Puritans and are still studied by theology students today. Turretin's theology is characterized by his defense of double predestination and the verbal inspiration of the Bible. His writings provide valuable insights into the intellectual climate of the time when confessional standards were written." says ChatGPT. • And honestly, Turretin is not a pope or an anything in terms of the Church today or in his day. He's free to forbid or encourage anything. But the range of his authority is about 1 inch all around him and no further. Nothing he forbids is binding on *anyone,* no offense. None of the past councils of the Church are binding on anyone, for none of them were inspired by God. It's nice that councils were formed, and that men had a sat-and-chat. No doubt some of their ideas were just peachy keen. But no past council and no past theologian has anything binding on anyone. • The writers of the New Testament and the teaching of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ... THOSE are binding. The church fathers encouraged good things, discouraged bad things and were mighty witnesses of the faith. But after the apostles, nothing binding stands. • The Masoretic Hebrew text stands in *_desperate need_* of textual correction. Care to challenge me in this, Ross? It is easily done. Why? • If I had a car that had holes in it... and it needed new metal restoring the place of the old metal along with a paint job, you can bet I'd get it done. If an old slogan on a wall painted by a famous painter that says "George Washington is my f iend" and we all knew it was supposed to be "friend", we'd fix it and restore it. If the Hebrew Masoretic text experienced drop-outs due to poor copying, and Hebrew experts of today, y'know, the people who actually *_read_* ancient Hebrew like it's today's newspaper, if they said: "The book's got errors," I for one would certainly want to hear what the issues are. *Psalm 145 is a classic example of a careless drop out.* This psalm is SUPPOSED to have 22 lines. Here's how we can work this out mathematically. Follow with me. The Hebrew Alphabet has TWENTY-TWO characters. The PSALM has TWENTY-ONE lines. Each line begins with a letter of the Hebrew Alphabet ... with the exception of "N". This style of Hebrew poetry (and can happen in English poetry) is called *_acrostic Poetry._* Still with me? Let's keep going. • So Jewish writers, most with PhD's over at theTorah dot com went over this Psalm. • They found it odd that the "N" verse was missing. Y'know J - K - L - M - O... hey! Where's the "N"????? • The Dead Sea Scrolls have Psalm 145 in full color. • The Septuagint, y'know the book that Turretin forbids (?) we use to "fix" the Hebrew text? Remember that guy? Y'know, the Hebrew // Greek expert??? Remember him? Well the Greek Septuagint has the "N" verse. WHOA!! And the Dead Sea Scrolls ALSO have the "N" verse. WHOA!!! Blow my MIND!! • How is that verse worded in other sources? What is the missing line? What do THEY have that the Masoretic Text does NOT have? Let's see.... But first, let's compare with the King James Perfect Bible: 13 (מ) Thy kingdom is an everlasting kingdom, And thy dominion endureth throughout all generations. 14 (ס) The Lord upholdeth all that fall, And raiseth up all those that be bowed down. Yes. The "N" or נ verse is missing. There is M, and there is S, but no N. Let's see if we can find the missing N. [The Missing Verse]: "The Lord is righteous in all his ways || and holy in all his works." [From the Dead Sea Scrolls]: "The Lord is faithful in all his words || and gracious in all his deeds." [From the King James Bible]: "............................................." [From the Masoretic Text]: "............................................" So, it's in the _Syriac,_ and it's in the _Dead Sea Scrolls,_ and also, and most important of all, in the _Greek Septuagint._ The Mighty MasoreticText... uhm. Well. It uhm... It falls flat. And so... does the King James Bible. Hmmm. That must hurt. Why would there be preserved passages of Scripture in OTHER versions (Syriac, Dead Sea Scrolls & Greek) but not in the Hebrew Bible? Here's a clue: ‣ "Yahawah is Faithful in all HIS WORDS || and gracious in all HIS WORKS." No one on earth can claim that for themselves. Remarkable, no? And it requires work on the part of scholars and theologians to re-assemble Scriptures the enemy has shattered. God has been faithful and has preserved his word. Now the onus is on our shoulders as gate keepers of his word to restore passages that have fallen by the wayside.

He sure is free to do so! We have what He chose in His New Testament! How is that sophistry? James 3:17-18 King James Version (KJV)But the wisdom that is from above is first pure, then peaceable, gentle, and easy to be intreated, full of mercy and good fruits, without partiality, and without hypocrisy. And the fruit of righteousness is sown in peace of them that make peace. May the Lord bless you!🙏📖

I am a Byzantine prioritist not a KJVO. I prefer the KJV and NKJV. To observe other perspectives, I also consult Robinson-Pierpont, Pickering, Boyd, WEB, BSB, NET, LSB and the NET LXX, Lexham LXX and Swete's LXX Psalter, La Sainte Bible Louis Segond 1910 and 2021, snd Bib la an Kreyòl ayisyen. May God bless you!🙏

Amen

The ESV OT is very poor. In fact, the KJV is much better in the fact that the KJV includes LXX readings...........

They are based on different manuscripts families.

@@sprayarm I know that!! All modern translations use older manuscripts that were not available in the 16th and 17th centuries, except the NKJV and MEV. Edit: I am sick and tired of people are trying to demonize these translations!!

Amen

I agree with you 10000%

…for toilet paper

@@johndisalvo6283 you would use God’s word as toilet paper. Seems like that’s not a good thing to do for one who claims to be a Christian

I'm Calvinist and use the KJV. The KJV translators were Calvinist.

@@dannymcmullan9375 good for you! Read Gen. 18:20 and 21 and you won't be Calvinist anymore. If you can, you got some splaining to do.

You’re demanding too much logic and scholarship for this lot!

@@johnrfrost He is, in the sense that no other son of God as His exact nature like Jesus does.

@@johnrfrost “Only” here means “only one of its kind / unique” [the earliest Latin translation is “unicus”].

@@johnrfrost I’m not sure that the same criticism couldn’t be made of “only-begotten”, as all the saved are sons and daughters begotten of God. The problem is, rather, modern ignorance of Biblical vocabulary. Additionally, the Bible is for believers - not that unbelievers shouldn’t read it, but study is necessary for understanding.

@@johnrfrost Just because people can misinterpret a passage doesn't make it a wrong translation. JW's misinterpret various passages to suggest that Jesus is a created being, like in Revelation 3:14: "And unto the angel of the church of the Laodiceans write; These things saith the Amen, the faithful and true witness, the beginning of the creation of God." - KJV They interpret that to mean that Jesus was the beginning or first thing that Jehovah God created. Now, obviously they're wrong, but that doesn't make the translation wrong, it's the interpretation that's wrong.

Moving targets everywhere......

@@vedinthorn because the translators said it's based off of the revised version. I think that's why

@@Beleeuer well, it kind of is, but it can be a successor to the RV without using the exact same source text. The New KJV is a successor to the KJV, but obviously uses different source texts for some updates.

They say it to feed the conspiracists