Skip to content

Add your phone number?

Optional. Nothing is sent unless you choose it.

The Historic Faith
Sign in
Question 9
Bercot highlights that Jewish leaders didn’t object when Jesus, Stephen, or the Ethiopian eunuch used the Septuagint (examples: Acts 7 with Amos and the “75 people,” Acts 8 with Isaiah 53); what does that suggest about first-century Jewish assumptions regarding Scripture authority, and how does it critique modern Christian confidence that there was a single, settled “official” Old Testament text in Jesus’ day?
Another way to ask: Jewish leaders didn’t seem to protest when Jesus or others used the Septuagint in places like Acts 7 and Acts 8. What does that suggest about what first-century Jews thought counted as Scripture, and does it weaken the idea that there was one official Old Testament text in Jesus’ day?

Direct Answer The transcript suggests first-century Jews— even Palestinian leaders—accepted the Septuagint as Scripture alongside other textual forms, which critiques the modern idea that there was one settled, universally recognized “official” Old Testament text in Jesus’ day.

Support from Transcript:

  • Bercot says Jews “for most of the first century… fully embraced the Septuagint,” asking how else apostles could preach to Greek-speaking Jews across the Mediterranean.
  • Jesus read Isaiah in Nazareth “from the Septuagint,” showing it was used in Greek-speaking synagogues in Galilee.
  • On two rebukes of Jewish leaders, Jesus quoted Septuagint wording, and the leaders did not respond that it “isn’t in the Scriptures”; Bercot argues they would have objected if they viewed it as “corrupt” or “inferior.”
  • Stephen before the Sanhedrin quotes the Septuagint with noticeable differences (Amos 5; “beyond Babylon,” “Remfen”; and “75 people” vs Masoretic “70”), yet the judges “never once said anything about his quoting false scriptures.”
  • The Ethiopian eunuch, a non-Christian proselyte, reads Isaiah 53 in Septuagint wording, showing typical use among Greek-speaking Jews.
Discussion Follow-ups If Scripture authority functioned this way in the first century, how should we handle textual variation without panic or accusations of “corruption”?