Skip to content

Add your phone number?

Optional. Nothing is sent unless you choose it.
The Historic Faith
Sign in
All Questions
Question 3
The Septuagint’s origin story (Ptolemy II, 72 translators, independent work, identical results) was treated by Philo, Josephus, and early Christians as credible and even “divinely inspired”; what assumptions about God’s ability to work through nonbelievers and imperfect motives (like building a library) are required to take that seriously?
Another way to ask: The Septuagint story says God guided a translation that was started by a nonreligious king for a library. What would you have to believe about God working through nonbelievers and mixed motives to take that story seriously?

Direct Answer To take the story seriously, the transcript suggests we must assume God can work providentially through Gentile rulers and mixed motives to accomplish His purposes, including making His Word accessible. It also assumes miracles on this scale are not hard for God and need not threaten Christian faith.

Support from Transcript:

  • Bercot says God worked through “a Gentile ruler… Ptolemy II Philadelphus” to commission the translation in the 3rd century BC.
  • Ptolemy’s motive, according to Bercot, was building “the largest library ever in existence,” not spiritual purity.
  • The high priest sent “a group of 72 scholars,” and Aristeas claims they translated in independent groups and the results “all read exactly the same,” leading Jews and later Christians to view it as “divinely inspired.”
  • Bercot notes an unbeliever might doubt it because it “points to the providential hand of God,” but he says for Christians “there’s nothing… that should be a problem.”
  • He compares it to other miracles: “certainly not one of the more spectacular.”
Discussion Follow-ups What kinds of “imperfect motives” today might God still use to spread access to Scripture (publishing, politics, education), even if the leaders’ hearts are not pure?

Jumpstarter 3 of 10
Back Questions Next