Jumpstarter 3 of 10

Ideas to help restart your discussion

Question 3

Bercot says the apostles quoted the Septuagint about 90% of the time and perhaps 100%, with some quotations not matching any existing Septuagint manuscripts today; what does that claim require you to believe about variation within “the Septuagint” in the first century, and how does it affect the way you think about precision in biblical quotation?

Another way to ask: If the apostles usually quoted the Septuagint, and some quotes don’t match any Septuagint copy we have today, what does that mean about how much the Septuagint varied back then? How should that shape your expectations about exact word-for-word quoting in the Bible?

Direct Answer It requires believing that “the Septuagint” in the first century existed in more than one form, and that apostolic quotations could be exact, paraphrastic, or drawn from Septuagintal readings not preserved in surviving copies.

Support from Transcript:

He says “about 90% of the time they quoted from the Septuagint,” and he thinks “likely… 100%.”
About 10% “don’t fit any of these Septuaginal texts that we have in existence today,” but likely matched a first-century Septuagint form.
He repeats that within textual families “there are variations,” so not every Septuagint manuscript reads the same.
He explains apostles often “simply paraphrasing,” and Greek lacked quotation marks, making intent (verbatim vs paraphrase) harder to detect.
He defines his 90% as quotations that “fit it exactly or at least… the general sense.”

Discussion Follow-ups How should paraphrase and “general sense” shape our expectations when we compare Old and New Testament citations today?

Jumpstarter 3 of 10

Add your phone number?

Thank you!

Jumpstarter 3 of 10