Discussion Jumpstarter
Study leader reference - not a definitive answer
Question 5
Adam insists New Testament authors show “fluidity” by quoting sometimes from the Septuagint, sometimes from the Hebrew tradition (e.g., Matthew 2:15/Hosea 11:1); what does this suggest about how the apostles viewed precision in quotation versus faithfulness to meaning, and where do modern evangelical habits about inerrancy and proof-texting clash with that?
Another way to ask: Adam says New Testament writers sometimes quote the Septuagint and sometimes the Hebrew text. What does that suggest about whether the apostles cared more about exact wording or about the main meaning, and where might that clash with modern ideas about inerrancy and proof-texting?
Discussion Jumpstarter
Direct Answer
Adam suggests the apostles were not rigid about reproducing an exact Old Testament wording but were faithful to Scripture while using the form most helpful to their audience—sometimes LXX, sometimes Hebrew, sometimes memory or other translation. That can clash with modern habits that expect quotations to always match one fixed text form word-for-word.
- He says NT quotations are often from the LXX, but with “minor variations,” suggesting authors quote “from memory or from other Greek translations or from their own translation.”
- He gives a clear Hebrew-based quote: Matthew 2:15 quoting Hosea 11:1, “Out of Egypt, I called my son” (MT) versus LXX “I called his children,” which “really wouldn’t work at all” for Matthew’s point.
- He concludes it’s “not fair” to say they “always quote from the Septuagint”; instead “they accept a certain amount of fluidity.”
- He ties this to mission context: much of the NT was for Gentiles “completely unfamiliar with the Masoretic text,” so quoting LXX “would make sense.”
- His “best of both worlds” model explicitly mirrors that apostolic flexibility.