Orienting the Discussion: Language, Audience, and Scripture in the First-Century World

The New Testament was written between roughly 49–96 C.E., in a Mediterranean world where Greek functioned as the shared public language. Jews in Judea heard Scripture in Hebrew with Aramaic explanation in synagogues; diaspora Jews heard the Hebrew read and then taught in Greek; and Gentile “God-fearers” learned Israel’s Scriptures through Greek. The Septuagint—the Jewish Greek translation of the Hebrew Scriptures produced from the third to the first centuries B.C.E.—stood ready-made for instruction, evangelism, and public discourse. The Apostles wrote to congregations that mixed Jews and Gentiles, and they wrote in Greek. This historical setting explains why New Testament authors regularly cite Scripture in Greek forms that correspond to the Septuagint, while still affirming the Hebrew text as the standard. Jesus affirmed the Hebrew’s precise written character when He said “not one iota, not one serif” would pass from the Law until all is accomplished; the reference to the smallest Hebrew letter (yod) and a tiny stroke signals the exactness the Messiah acknowledged. Public mission required Greek, but textual authority resided in the Hebrew that Jehovah entrusted to Israel.

What Counts as a “Citation,” and How Often Do New Testament Writers Use the Septuagint?

New Testament engagement with the Old Testament appears along a spectrum: formal quotations introduced by formulas such as “it is written” or “so that it might be fulfilled”; embedded citations without formula; and numerous allusions and echoes. Formal quotations are the most measurable. When these are compared to the Hebrew Masoretic Text and to standard Septuagint readings, a strong majority of the formal quotations align more closely with the Septuagint’s Greek wording than with a literal back-translation of the Masoretic Hebrew. A smaller but significant share follows the Hebrew form closely, sometimes against the standard Greek; and a final group reflects an Apostolic rendering that is neither straightforwardly Masoretic nor standard Septuagintal but is a faithful translation or contextual paraphrase in Greek. The distribution varies by author and genre. Matthew, writing to a readership familiar with Jewish Scripture, often preserves wording that stands near the Hebrew while also reproducing widespread Greek renderings. Paul, addressing Greek-speaking congregations across the empire between about 49–67 C.E., heavily employs Greek forms familiar to his hearers; Hebrews, composed before the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 C.E. or not long after, frequently follows Greek wordings because the author addresses a Greek-reading audience schooled in the synagogue’s Scripture. The pattern is not arbitrary: the writers choose the wording that best serves accurate communication to a Greek-speaking congregation while maintaining fidelity to the Hebrew base.

It is essential to distinguish a translator’s or author’s choice of Greek words from the question of a different underlying Hebrew text. Much apparent “agreement with the LXX” is simply the use of a conventional Jewish Greek rendering of the Masoretic Hebrew. In other places the Septuagint preserves an older Hebrew reading, and the New Testament author’s choice of that Greek form indicates knowledge of, or alignment with, an earlier Hebrew variant supported by the Dead Sea Scrolls. A minority of cases are deliberate Apostolic paraphrases crafted for theological application and pastoral clarity. Such distinctions keep one from inflating raw counts into misleading theories about “preference” for Greek over Hebrew. The Apostles used Greek because the churches read Greek; they employed Greek forms that accurately communicated the Hebrew truth; and at times they intentionally highlighted a Greek rendering that preserved an earlier Hebrew reading.

Why Greek Wordings Predominate in the New Testament Quotations Without Displacing Hebrew Authority

A Greek quotation in the New Testament serves at least three functions in a first-century letter or Gospel. It lets a mixed congregation hear the Scripture in the language of the letter itself; it connects congregational memory to synagogue reading where Greek renderings circulated; and it carries the argument forward with the same semantic content that the Hebrew expresses. None of this requires abandoning the Hebrew’s primacy. In synagogue life, the Hebrew scroll remained the base, even in the diaspora. The Greek translation existed to serve that base, not to supplant it. The New Testament’s practice matches this reality. Jesus taught from Hebrew scrolls in Galilean synagogues during His ministry in 29–33 C.E.; the Apostles, evangelizing cities from 49–67 C.E., wrote Greek letters and sermons to congregations formed by synagogue reading and Septuagint exposure. A Greek citation signals pastoral realism, not a new canon. When a Greek rendering diverged from the Masoretic wording in a way that sharpened a point the author wished to make, the Apostolic writer could lawfully adopt it, since translation is a matter of conveying the intended sense of the Hebrew into the receptor language. When the Greek preserved an earlier Hebrew reading demonstrably older than the medieval Masoretic form, its use in the New Testament shows sober textual judgment.

Case Study One: Hebrews 10:5–7 and Psalm 40:6–8—“A Body You Prepared for Me” and the Obedience of the Messiah

Psalm 40:6 in the Masoretic Text reads, “Ears You have dug for me,” a vivid idiom picturing the servant’s ear opened for obedience. The Septuagint renders the same line, “A body You prepared for me.” The writer of Hebrews cites the latter within an argument about the insufficiency of animal sacrifices and the arrival of the obedient Messiah whose once-for-all offering brings true cleansing. At first glance, the difference looks stark. On sober analysis, the semantic center is the same: the Psalmist confesses that the worshipper, and ultimately the Messiah, stands ready for total obedience to Jehovah’s will. The Hebrew expresses readiness through the ear, the organ of listening; the Greek expresses readiness through the whole embodied person. The author of Hebrews is not correcting the Hebrew, nor is He dependent on a flawed translator. He employs a Jewish Greek rendering that communicates the Psalm’s point in Greek idiom, and He applies it to the Incarnate Son’s obedient self-offering. The theological implication in Hebrews is not a change of doctrine but a rich elaboration: the Son’s entire embodied life fulfills the will that the Psalmist voiced, and His obedience culminates in the once-for-all sacrifice that the sacrificial law anticipated. The Masoretic wording teaches obedience; the Greek wording teaches the same obedience with a different image. The writer’s use of the Septuagint is a model of faithful application, not a signal of instability in the text.

Case Study Two: Acts 15:16–18 and Amos 9:11–12—“The Remnant of Mankind” or “The Remnant of Edom” at the Jerusalem Council (49 C.E.)

At the Jerusalem Council in 49 C.E., James sums up the prophetic witness by citing words from Amos 9. The Masoretic Text reads that Israel will “possess the remnant of Edom,” while the Septuagint reads that the restored tent of David will embrace “the remnant of mankind.” The difference turns on the similarity between “Edom” and “man” in Hebrew consonants and on the translator’s decision. A Hebrew copy from the Judean wilderness supports the Masoretic reading “Edom.” James cites the Greek wording because it conveys the prophetic intent of worldwide inclusion in language immediately comprehensible to a Greek-speaking audience. He does not overturn the Hebrew. The context in Amos speaks of the nations called by Jehovah’s Name; the Greek rendering generalizes that point into “mankind” without erasing Edom’s historical place in Israel’s story. The theological implication James draws is anchored in the Hebrew promise itself: the restored Davidic rule will gather Gentiles into worship of the one true God through the Messiah. The Septuagint’s generalizing diction assists communication to a mixed assembly facing the practical question of Gentile inclusion. James uses the Greek that carries the Hebrew promise to the proper conclusion without demanding a woodenly literal citation. The church’s doctrine of inclusion rests on the Hebrew prophecy; the Greek serves that doctrine by stating the implication clearly in the lingua franca.

Case Study Three: Hebrews 1:6 and Deuteronomy 32:43—When the Septuagint Preserves an Older Hebrew Line

Hebrews 1 assembles Scripture to prove the Son’s superiority to angels. Among the citations stands, “Let all God’s angels worship Him.” This line appears in the Septuagint at the end of Deuteronomy 32:43 and in a Greek Psalm; a Judean wilderness Hebrew manuscript of Deuteronomy also preserves the line, while the medieval Masoretic tradition lacks it. Here the Septuagint is not an interpretive paraphrase; it is a witness to earlier Hebrew wording. The writer’s choice of the Greek line draws upon genuine textual evidence older than our medieval Hebrew codices. The theological point is precise: if heavenly beings worship the Son, then He is superior to them in rank and nature. The use of a Septuagint line that corresponds to older Hebrew confirms a central point this book insists upon: the Masoretic Text is our base, but when a Septuagint reading is corroborated by early Hebrew witnesses and fits the context, it deserves full weight.

Case Study Four: Romans 3:10–18—Paul’s Catena and the Septuagint’s Readable Greek

Paul, writing Romans from Corinth in 56–57 C.E., strings together lines from Psalms and Isaiah to demonstrate universal sin. The chain relies on Greek forms familiar from the Septuagint. The Psalms’ metaphors—throats as open graves, venom under lips, swift feet for shedding blood—are carried in fluent Greek that first-century assemblies would recognize. Where the Masoretic Hebrew and the Septuagint differ slightly in wording, the difference does not alter the accusation or the conclusion. Paul’s catena is not a private translation but an inspired use of known Greek renditions to bring a corporate indictment to Jew and Gentile alike. The hermeneutical gain for pastors is simple: when composing doctrine-laden argumentation for Greek-speaking congregations, Paul used Greek Scripture as it was commonly read in the synagogues of the diaspora, confident that it faithfully carried the Hebrew’s teaching.

Case Study Five: Matthew 12:17–21 and Isaiah 42:1–4—“In His Name the Nations Will Hope”

Matthew cites Isaiah 42 to explain Jesus’ gentle mission. The Masoretic Text closes verse 4 with “the coastlands wait for His law,” a Hebrew idiom for distant peoples. The Septuagint reads, “in His name the nations will hope.” Matthew reproduces the Greek wording because it states explicitly what the Hebrew idiom conveys: far-off peoples will place confident expectation in the Servant’s person and authority. The theological effect is pastoral and missional. Matthew’s audience, living in the decades around 60–70 C.E., watched Gentiles flock into the Messiah’s kingdom; the Greek makes the direction of that movement explicit without violating the Hebrew’s sense. No doctrinal discontinuity exists here. The Servant’s mission stretches beyond Israel to the nations, and the Greek diction makes that extension transparent to hearers who no longer assign “coastlands” an instinctive metaphorical value.

Case Study Six: 1 Peter 2:22–25 and Isaiah 53—Septuagintal Diction in Apostolic Pastoral Care

Peter writes to assemblies in Asia Minor who faced suffering and social pressure in the early 60s C.E. He quotes Isaiah 53 with Greek wording that corresponds closely to the Septuagint: “who committed no sin, nor was deceit found in his mouth,” “by His wounds you were healed,” and the picture of believers returning to the Shepherd and Overseer of souls. The Septuagint’s Greek diction carries the Hebrew’s suffering-servant prophecy with clarity for Gentile readers. Where the Greek and Hebrew differ in nuance (for example, the range of a term for “bruise” or “wound”), the theological load is unchanged: the Messiah’s righteous suffering secures the healing and restoration of His people. Peter’s choice to employ familiar Greek diction is a pastoral decision in line with his commission to feed the flock in a Greek-speaking world.

Case Study Seven: Luke 4:18–19, Isaiah 61:1–2, and Isaiah 58:6—A Synagogue Reading Rendered in Greek

Luke records Jesus’ reading in the Nazareth synagogue around 29 C.E. and gives the wording in Greek: “He has sent me to proclaim liberty to the captives and recovery of sight to the blind,” a phrase that reflects a Septuagintal rendering and also echoes language from Isaiah 58:6. The Hebrew of Isaiah 61 speaks of freedom for captives and opening of the prison; the Septuagint’s Greek uses terms that Greek hearers associate with sight and release. Luke’s narrative renders Jesus’ Hebrew synagogue reading in Greek for his audience, selecting the recognized Greek phrasing that communicated Jubilee release to congregations across the empire. The theological center remains unchanged: the Messiah inaugurates liberation and restoration. The report in Greek neither claims that Jesus read a Greek scroll in Nazareth nor implies correction of the Hebrew. It is the Spirit-guided historian’s Greek presentation of a Hebrew event to a Greek readership.

Case Study Eight: Matthew 21:16 and Psalm 8:2—Prepared Praise from Infants and the Sense of the Hebrew

When children cry out in the Temple, Jesus cites Psalm 8:2 as the decisive answer to the critics: “Out of the mouth of infants and nursing babies you prepared praise.” The Masoretic form reads “You established strength,” an idiom that links praise with strength in Hebrew poetic parallelism. The Septuagint reads “prepared praise,” a straightforward interpretive rendering of the parallelism’s effect. Jesus’ use of the Greek form advances no new theology; it surfaces the Hebrew’s implied equivalence between praise to Jehovah and the display of His strength. The argument’s force depends on the authority of the Psalm, not on exploiting a variant. The Greek expresses the Hebrew sense with transparent clarity, and Jesus’ use of it exemplifies lawful public citation in Greek for a mixed audience already accustomed to hearing Scripture in that form.

Case Study Nine: John 19:37 and Zechariah 12:10—A Place Where the New Testament Follows the Hebrew Against the Greek

Not every New Testament citation follows Septuagintal phrasing. When John records the piercing of Jesus’ side and cites Zechariah 12:10, he writes, “They will look on Him whom they pierced.” The Masoretic Hebrew carries exactly that sense; common Septuagintal forms render the verse differently. John’s choice affirms that the Evangelist treated the Hebrew as normative and felt no pressure to imitate a Greek rendering where it failed to convey the line’s exact force. The theological point—Messiah pierced and looked upon—arises from the Hebrew. The Gospel’s Greek preserves that form to bind eyewitness testimony to prophecy.

Case Study Ten: Ephesians 4:8 and Psalm 68:18—The Giver of Gifts and Apostolic Exposition

Paul quotes Psalm 68:18 in Ephesians 4:8. The Masoretic Hebrew reads that the victorious King “received gifts among men”; the Septuagint preserves that same movement of “receiving.” Paul writes, “He gave gifts to men,” drawing out the psalm’s logic by applying the victory procession to the ascended Messiah who distributes gifts to His body. Jewish exegesis also recognized the distributive logic of the victory hymn, and the Aramaic synagogue tradition paraphrased the verse in the direction Paul takes. Paul’s line is not a textual variant but an inspired exposition of the Hebrew’s theological movement: the One who receives tribute in triumph dispenses benefits to His people. Here the Apostle neither replicates the Septuagint nor corrects the Hebrew. He expounds the text’s intent in the form of a quotation that functions as a doctrinal thesis for the paragraph that follows.

Beyond Formal Quotations: Allusions, Narrative Texture, and the Septuagint’s Background Role

New Testament authors weave Old Testament diction into narrative and exhortation, not only in formal quotations. Luke narrates events in language flavored by the Greek Psalms and Prophets; Paul’s ethical sections echo the Decalogue and the Holiness Code in Greek; Revelation’s visions refract the Prophets’ images in Greek dress. These allusions usually reflect the Septuagint’s word choices. Their purpose is catechetical and liturgical: congregations formed by public reading of the Greek Scriptures recognize the rhythms and vocabulary of the Old Testament as part of their own worship and instruction. Again, this is not a matter of displacing Hebrew authority; it is the Bible’s teaching carried into Greek words for a Greek-reading church. The Masoretic Text remains the standard from which faithful translations are made; the Septuagint’s Greek functions as the church’s early translation heritage that faithfully bears the same teaching.

Jesus, the Apostles, and the Question of “Preference”: Hebrew Base, Greek Communication

The question “Did Jesus and the Apostles prefer the Septuagint?” is poorly framed. Jesus read from Hebrew scrolls, affirmed the inviolability of Hebrew letters, and engaged scribes on the precise Hebrew wording of the Law and the Prophets. The Apostles, many of whom were native to Judea and Galilee, knew the Hebrew text and taught from it. At the same time, when preaching and writing to Greek-speaking congregations, they cited Scripture in Greek forms because the churches read Greek. Preference for the Hebrew as the base text and use of Greek as the vehicle for communication are not competing loyalties; they are complementary habits in the life of a bilingual people. The evidence shows four recurrent patterns. First, Jesus and the Apostles treat the Hebrew consonantal form as authoritative for exegesis, as when arguments turn on single words or letters. Second, they employ widespread Septuagint renderings when addressing Greek-reading audiences, confident that these renderings communicate the Hebrew accurately. Third, they occasionally adopt a Septuagint line that preserves an older Hebrew reading attested among the Judean wilderness manuscripts, as in Hebrews 1:6 with Deuteronomy 32:43. Fourth, they at times supply their own Greek translation or exposition to make doctrine and application unmistakably clear in context, as with Ephesians 4:8. These four habits, taken together, show fidelity to the Hebrew and pastoral wisdom in communication. They do not show a blanket preference for one language over the other.

The Divine Name, “Lord,” and the Apostolic Practice

In the Hebrew Scriptures the Divine Name appears thousands of times; faithful translation into English should reflect this by using “Jehovah” wherever the Tetragrammaton stands. Early Jewish Greek translators often wrote the Name in ancient Hebrew letters within Greek lines; later Greek manuscripts in Christian use employ κύριος as a reverential surrogate, often in the contracted “nomen sacrum” form. New Testament authors cite Old Testament passages with κύριος in the text they write, because they are composing Greek documents for assemblies that read Greek and say κύριος in worship. This does not imply that Jesus or the Apostles denied the Name in the Hebrew. It reflects the scribal and liturgical realities of Greek communication. When New Testament authors apply Old Testament “Jehovah” texts to Jesus and use κύριος, they are making Christological claims on the basis of the Hebrew Scriptures’ testimony about Jehovah’s actions and prerogatives, conveyed in Greek to their hearers. Respect for the Name, fidelity to the Hebrew, and practical use of Greek in church life coexist without contradiction in the Apostolic practice.

How to Weigh New Testament Citations in Exegesis Today Without Slipping Into Speculation

Pastors, serious students, and seminary classrooms should handle New Testament citations with deliberate method. Begin with the Masoretic Text as the base, because it preserves the Hebrew consonantal line stabilized in the synagogue and reliably transmitted into our earliest complete codices. Compare the New Testament citation to the Septuagint’s Greek and note the degree of alignment. Ask whether the difference is translational, textual, or expository. A translational difference arises when the Greek expresses the same Hebrew meaning in idiomatic Greek, as with Psalm 8:2’s “prepared praise.” A textual difference exists when the Septuagint’s line matches earlier Hebrew material attested in Judean wilderness manuscripts or when it explains a later Masoretic omission, as with Deuteronomy 32:43 in Hebrews 1:6. An expository difference appears when an Apostolic writer rewrites a line for doctrinal application, as with Ephesians 4:8. Next, consider the author’s audience and purpose. A diaspora congregation in Corinth or Rome required Greek; a Judean debate with Pharisees turns upon Hebrew terms and letter-forms. Finally, teach the congregation the result with measured confidence: the New Testament writers were not uncertain about their Scriptures; they knew exactly what they were doing when they cited the Law, the Prophets, and the Writings in Greek to proclaim the Messiah’s fulfillment.

Additional Test Cases That Clarify Categories and Guard Doctrine

Matthew 1:23 cites Isaiah 7:14 with the Greek word parthenos, “virgin.” The Masoretic Hebrew uses ‘almah, a term for a young woman of marriageable age that in every Old Testament context presumes sexual chastity. The Greek translator chose the specific word that carries the moral and social expectation bound to the Hebrew term in its context and in the sign promised to the house of David. Matthew, writing before 70 C.E., presents the conception of Jesus by the Holy Spirit as the fulfillment of the prophetic sign. The doctrine does not depend on a mistranslation; it rests on the legitimate semantic reach of the Hebrew term articulated with precision in Greek.

Matthew 2:6 cites Micah 5:2 with interpretive amplification. The Masoretic Hebrew names Bethlehem and speaks of the ruler whose origins are from ancient days. Matthew gives the location and clarifies the pastoral role of the ruler in the familiar Greek of his day, suitable for readers who need the prophecy’s import laid out without stumbling over unfamiliar Hebrew poetic structure. The prophecy’s core—Messiah’s Davidic birth in Bethlehem, with preeminent antiquity and authority—remains unaltered.

Romans 9:27–29 combines Isaiah lines in a Greek form common to the Septuagint. The theology of remnant and mercy is not contingent on the exact Septuagint diction; the Hebrew undergirds the same truth. Paul uses the Greek to communicate clearly to Roman assemblies where Jews and Gentiles together must grasp how Jehovah preserves a people by grace, not by mass ethnicity.

Galatians 3:16 draws an argument from the singular “seed.” This is a Hebrew-based argument that depends on knowledge of the Hebrew form of the promise to Abraham. Paul’s point does not arise from a Greek mistranslation; it arises from covenant exegesis that treats the Hebrew wording with precision and then proclaims the Christological fulfillment to a Greek-reading church.

Hebrews 8:8–12 cites Jeremiah 31 at length from a Greek text that closely mirrors the Hebrew. The new covenant’s features—internalization of the law, universal knowledge of God among the covenant people, and complete forgiveness—come across in Greek as faithfully as in Hebrew. The author’s reliance on Greek here demonstrates again that Greek usage in the New Testament is the ordinary mode of faithful transmission, not evidence of textual instability.

Chronological Anchors for the New Testament’s Use of the Septuagint

Jesus’ public ministry took place in 29–33 C.E., with His death and resurrection in 33 C.E. The Apostolic mission rapidly expanded from Jerusalem in the late 30s C.E. Paul’s letters cluster from about 49–67 C.E.; James likely wrote in the 40s or early 50s C.E.; Peter wrote in the early and mid-60s C.E.; the Gospels took written form between the 50s and 90s C.E., with Mark typically placed first, Matthew and Luke in the following decades, and John near the end of the century. During this entire span the churches across the empire used Greek for worship and instruction, while Jewish communities continued to guard and read the Hebrew Scriptures. The Septuagint’s long history—Pentateuch in the third century B.C.E., Prophets and Writings over the next two centuries—meant that when the Apostles wrote, the Jewish Greek Scriptures were already deeply embedded in synagogue life far beyond Judea. The Dead Sea Scrolls (third century B.C.E. through the first century C.E.) demonstrate that the Hebrew textual base the Apostles honored already exhibited the stability that would characterize the later Masoretic tradition. These chronological anchors support a straightforward conclusion about practice: the Apostles handled Scripture with reverence for the Hebrew text and with sober, skillful use of Greek so that congregations could hear and obey.

Practical Guidance for Preachers and Students: Using the Septuagint in Service of the Hebrew Text

When preparing to preach or teach a New Testament passage that quotes the Old Testament, work from the Masoretic Text in translation and, where possible, consult the Hebrew. Compare the quotation’s Greek with the Septuagint and determine whether the quotation reproduces a standard Jewish Greek rendering, follows the Hebrew directly, reflects an earlier Hebrew line that the Septuagint preserves, or functions as an inspired exposition. Resist the temptation to talk as if different wording necessarily signals contradiction. In Psalm 40 and Hebrews 10 the images differ but the obedience is the same; in Amos 9 and Acts 15 the audience’s needs and the promise’s scope explain the writer’s choice; in Deuteronomy 32 and Hebrews 1 the Septuagint preserves earlier Hebrew. Teach these realities plainly. Emphasize that Jehovah preserved His Word through ordinary means—Hebrew scribal diligence, synagogue reading, careful Greek translation—and that by weighing manuscripts with discipline the church obtains the original words with confidence.

A Word on Counting, Weighing, and the Reliability of the Old Testament in the Apostolic Age

Raw statistics—how many times the New Testament “uses the LXX”—are less important than the principle of weighing evidence. A high proportion of formal quotations reflect conventional Jewish Greek renderings; a fair number reveal direct knowledge of the Hebrew; some draw on Septuagint forms that correspond to older Hebrew than the medieval Masoretic. In every category, the stability of the underlying text is evident. The message proclaimed by Jesus and the Apostles rests on the same Hebrew Scriptures that the synagogue guarded, and the Greek renderings they used carried that message accurately to Greek-speaking congregations. Where there is a difference with doctrinal bearing, as in Hebrews 1:6, the Septuagint’s reading is anchored in early Hebrew. Where there is a difference with pastoral bearing, as in Matthew 12 or Luke 4, the Septuagint’s idiom states the Hebrew sense more directly for the audience in view. This is precisely what responsible translation and faithful textual criticism are supposed to do.

The Takeaway for the Church’s Confidence and the Seminary’s Task

The New Testament’s handling of the Old Testament offers a tested model. The Masoretic Text serves as the base because it transmits the stabilized synagogue text with supreme care; the Septuagint serves as a vital witness and a teaching tool that carries the Hebrew into Greek accurately and, at times, preserves earlier Hebrew readings of weight. Jesus and the Apostles honor the Hebrew’s letters and words while speaking Scripture in Greek for a world that needed Greek. Their practice teaches today’s church to translate faithfully, to weigh manuscripts carefully, and to proclaim with assurance what Jehovah has given. The path of restoration is ordinary and sure: learn the Hebrew, consult the Greek, and let both serve the truth in preaching, catechesis, and pastoral care.

You May Also Enjoy

Comparison of Modern Bible Versions and Their Utilization of Textual Criticism

See more

About the Author

CLICK LINKED IMAGE TO VISIT ONLINE STORE

CLICK TO SCROLL THROUGH OUR BOOKS