CD Set: Discovering the Septuagint

CD Set: Discovering the Septuagint

Average rating:
average rating 93%
(3)

David Bercot. This is David Bercot's most in-depth teaching on the Septuagint (LXX) to-date. Bercot explains what the LXX is and relates its history. Jesus and His apostles almost always quoted from the LXX when they quoted the O.T. The LXX was the O.T. of the early church. However, the Roman Catholic Church eventually switched from the LXX to the Masoretic Text (MT), and the Reformers followed suit. . . more.
Three 60 min. CDs. $11.95

$11.95
Qty

David Bercot. This is David Bercot's most in-depth teaching on the Septuagint (LXX) to-date. Bercot explains what the LXX is and relates its history. Jesus and His apostles almost always quoted from the LXX when they quoted the O.T. The LXX was the O.T. of the early church. However, the Roman Catholic Church eventually switched from the LXX to the Masoretic Text (MT), and the Reformers followed suit.

In the 3rd CD of this set, Bercot addresses the popular notion that the MT preserves the exact text of the original Bible writers, without a jot or tittle changed. He also talks about the various ways the LXX will bless you when you begin using it for Bible reading and study.
Three 60 min. CDs. $11.95
Average rating:
average rating 93%
3 reviews

Featured positive reviews:

average rating 100%
Outstanding 09/19/2016
By Steven Miller
This is not a new review. Please replace my previous review with the corrected one below the --------. I had a mistake in my last paragraph. As you can see, I do not know Greek. thank you.
-------------------
Bercot is easy and enjoyable to listen to. He is direct, has thought things out from many angles, yet simple and humble. This gave me a new view of the Septuagint, which I will now read, and read it with a lot more respect.
I disagree with Bercot on only 2 details:
1) The Hebrew word "almah" does mean "virgin". The root of the word means "unknown", meaning "innocent young woman". In the Hebrew Bible the intimate physical relation between a husband and wife is described with the verb "know". The usage of "almah" in Song of Songs 1:3 & 6:8 require the meaning of "virgin". The Orthodox Jewish translation, the Stone Tanach, which is a good literal translation except for being very biased against Christ, tries very hard to translate "almah" as "young woman" throughout, but could not do that in SoS 1:3 & 6:8, so they had to twist it and translate "almah" as "nations", which it never means.
"Almah" is the only Hebrew word that unambiguously means "virgin". "Betulah", which Bercot says means "virgin", has the root meaning of "separated" and means a proper woman who either is a virgin, or was a virgin before marriage and has remained married to one husband (Joel 1:8; Esth 2:17, 19; Deu 22:15-16). Any time that "betulah" is used to mean "virgin", it is always modified such as in Gen 24:16 "a betulah AND no man had known her".
Bercot said that what convinced him that "almah" means just "young woman" was that the maie form, "alam" (1Sam 17:56; 20:22) just means "young man" with no reference to virginity. The maie form need not have the same emphasis as the female. "alam" means a young innocent unmarried man. In 1Sam 17:56 the emphasis is that young unmarried David is an unknown, a mystery, and in 20:22 the meaning is that the young arrow-fetcher is innocent as to what is going on. This is also very interesting because Bercot argues, very well, (which was new to me) that 1Sam 17:55-18:5 is not in the original. It is not in LXX, and there is absolutely no way to reconcile it with the end of the previous chapter. Why was this strange and troublesome story added to the text? I believe it was a story in existence outside the inspired Bible, and scribe(s) added it to the Bible after the time of Christ in order to support that "almah" means "young woman" and not "virgin". It was chosen by the committee because of their desire to have almah not mean "virgin".

2) Matthew 1:23 did not take his translation of Isa 7:14 from LXX. There is an extremely important difference. LXX matches MT Isa 7:14. The MT literally says "and you (2nd person feminine singular) shall call his name Immanuel", which does not make sense because Isaiah is not talking to a woman. Because it doesn't make sense, English translators translate it as "she shall call", which is not what it says. LXX literally also says "and you (2nd person common singular) shall call". Matthew, however, says "they shall call". A famous rabbi, Rabbi Tovia Singer, argued correctly that "She shall call" means the mother shall call the son "God with us" which could just mean that at the time of the birth, she felt that God was with Israel. However "they shall call" means that many other unnamed people will call his name "God with us", which means that that is what the son really is - the son is actually God with us. The rabbi, of course, condemned Matthew for such "paganism". A little later, the Dead Sea Scrolls were made public, and the Dead Sea Scrolls exactly match Matthew 1:23. Apparently, some Jewish leaders, before the time of the LXX, preferred the mistaken and nonsensical "you (feminine singular) shall call" over "they shall call" because they knew the implications of "they shall call" and thought that to be heresy.
average rating 100%
Outstanding 09/17/2016
By Steven Miller
Bercot is easy and enjoyable to listen to. He is direct, has thought things out from many angles, yet simple and humble. This gave me a new view of the Septuagint, which I will now read, and read it with a lot more respect.
I disagree with Bercot on only 2 details:
1) The Hebrew word "almah" does mean "virgin". The root of the word means "unknown", meaning "innocent young woman". In the Hebrew Bible the intimate physical relation between a husband and wife is described with the verb "know". The usage of "almah" in Song of Songs 1:3 & 6:8 require the meaning of "virgin". The Orthodox Jewish translation, the Stone Tanach, which is a good literal translation except for being very biased against Christ, tries very hard to translate "almah" as "young woman" throughout, but could not do that in SoS 1:3 & 6:8, so they had to twist it and translate "almah" as "nations", which it never means.
"Almah" is the only Hebrew word that unambiguously means "virgin". "Betulah", which Bercot says means "virgin", has the root meaning of "separated" and means a proper woman who either is a virgin, or was a virgin before marriage and has remained married to one husband (Joel 1:8; Esth 2:17, 19; Deu 22:15-16). Any time that "betulah" is used to mean "virgin", it is always modified such as in Gen 24:16 "a betulah AND no man had known her".
Bercot said that what convinced him that "almah" means just "young woman" was that the maie form, "alam" (1Sam 17:56; 20:22) just means "young man" with no reference to virginity. The maie form need not have the same emphasis as the female. "alam" means an innocent unmarried man. In 1Sam 17:56 the emphasis is that young unmarried David is an unknown, a mystery, and in 20:22 the meaning is that the young arrow-fetcher is innocent as to what is going on. This is also very interesting because Bercot pointed out, very correctly, (which was new to me) that 1Sam 17:55-18:5 is not in the original. It is not in LXX, and there is absolutely no way to reconcile it with the end of the previous chapter. Why was this strange and troublesome story added to the text? I believe it was a story in existence outside the inspired Bible, and scribe(s) added it to the Bible after the time of Christ in order to support that "almah" means "young woman" and not "virgin". It was chosen by the committee because of their desire to have almah not mean "virgin".

2) Matthew 1:23 did not take his translation of Isa 7:14 from LXX. There is an extremely important difference. LXX exactly matches MT for Isa 7:14 to the minute detail. The MT literally says "and you (2nd person feminine singular) shall call his name Immanuel", which does not make sense because Isaiah is not talking to a woman. Because it doesn't make sense, English translators translate it as "she shall call", which is not what it says. LXX literally also says "and you (2nd person fem singular) shall call", which shows how faithful they were as translators. English translations of the Greek, "fix" it and translate it as "she shall call". Matthew, however, says "they shall call". A famous rabbi, Rabbi Tovia Singer, argued correctly that "She shall call" means the mother shall call the son "God with us" which could just mean that at the time of the birth, she felt that God was with Israel. However "they shall call" means that many other people call his name "God with us", which means that that is what the son really is - the son is actually God with us. The rabbi, of course, condemned Matthew for such "paganism". A little later, the Dead Sea Scrolls were made public, and the Dead Sea Scrolls exactly match Matthew 1:23. Some Jewish leaders, before Christ came, preferred the mistaken and nonsensical "you (feminine) shall call" over "they shall call" because they knew the implications of "they shall call" and thought that to be heresy.
average rating 80%
The fruit of a Berean's research 07/02/2016
By Donald McKay
This set examines in-depth the origin of the Septuagint and God's strategy for using it to prepare the Mediterranean world for the good news of Jesus. Numerous quotations compare the New Testament with the Masoretic Text and the Septuagint. I also appreciate this perspective on the manuscript variations being allowed by God for good reason. I recommend this investigation into how the LXX came to be for centuries and how and why it came into disuse for many more centuries. I hope a 4th CD will be added to this set, covering the LXX's inclusion of the Deuterocanonical books and the textual discrepancies within the LXX manuscripts. As one of numerous examples, I have Brenton's diglot and the Apostolic Bible Polyglot, and see Brenton's missing Messianic titles in Isaiah 9:6 which the latter retains, and wonder if there is a historical explanation.
 

Other items you might want to order: