Re: [lxx] Re: Septuagint in the NT
- Mitrophan Chin wrote:
>>Certainly the books had diverse backgrounds, butWell, as far as is known, Christians used codexes back to the earliest
>>what is your reference
>>for saying they weren't gathered together into one
>>book in the first
>My impression was back then, people don't have the
>printing press, and therefore there aren't any books
>and everything has to be handwritten. I assumed the
>Jews used scrolls to write down their scriptures and I
>don't think it's managable to unroll a scroll with all
>the books of the bible in it. you'll need a very big
>open area to read it from beginning to end, which
>probably won't fit indoors if you lay it out flat.
times, perhaps even the first century, so they could have been in one book.
But you seemed to want to imply that nobody knew what the official "LXX"
was back in the first century. Whether they are actually joined in the
one book wouldn't really affect that.
> You wrote, in part:Since the 72 in Alexandria seems to be a fiction, not fact, we need to
>a) LXX refers to the 70 or 72 learned people who
>translated the Torah/Pentateuch from Hebrew into Greek, in
>Alexandria, according to the Letter of Aristeas.
people understood that fiction. Which I think was that the whole OT was
done by the 72,
even if the legend didn't start out that way.