Discussion Jumpstarter
Study leader reference - not a definitive answer
Question 1
Adam argues that “a translation of the original source is always far superior than a translation of a translation,” yet he also calls the Septuagint “maybe…a divinely inspired translation”; how do those two claims fit together, and what does that combination reveal about God’s willingness to work through imperfect textual situations?
Another way to ask: Adam says a translation from the original is best, but also says the Septuagint might be inspired by God. How can both be true, and what does that say about God working through imperfect texts?
Discussion Jumpstarter
Direct Answer
Adam treats “original-language priority” as a normal translation principle, while still believing God genuinely used (and may have “divinely inspired”) the Septuagint as a practical instrument for the early church. Together, that implies God can powerfully work through non-ideal textual situations without those situations becoming the new standard.
- He states a guiding principle: “a translation of the original source is always far superior than a translation of a translation… all things being equal,” because “things are inevitably lost in translation.”
- Yet he affirms the Septuagint’s role: “The Septuagint was the Old Testament of the early church,” and through it “the church grew and gained converts.”
- He even says the Septuagint was “a very useful translation… We might even say a divinely inspired translation… It blessed them.”
- Still, he warns against replacing Hebrew: “we should not conclude from that that the Septuagint should supplant the Hebrew.”
- He parallels it to the KJV: God used it greatly, but “not many of us would argue” KJV English should replace Greek as the source for new translations.