Setting the Stage: Why the Septuagint Still Matters for Translators and Teachers

The Septuagint was produced between the third and first centuries B.C.E. to serve Greek-reading Jews across the Mediterranean. By the time Jesus ministered in 29–33 C.E. and the Apostles wrote between 49–96 C.E., Scripture in Greek was the common Bible of diaspora synagogues and of many early congregations. Today, even though the Masoretic Text—preserved in codices such as Aleppo (c. 930 C.E.) and Leningrad (1008/1009 C.E.)—rightly functions as the base text for establishing the original Hebrew wording, translators and commentators still consult the Septuagint constantly. The reason is simple and practical. The LXX is an ancient Jewish translation that often reflects a Hebrew Vorlage earlier than our medieval Hebrew codices; at times it preserves older readings now confirmed by Judean wilderness manuscripts; frequently it carries the same Hebrew sense in Hebraized Greek; and it regularly clarifies idioms for modern audiences. A disciplined, evidence-first approach keeps the Masoretic Text primary while allowing the LXX to assist, inform, and—where converging witnesses demand—correct later readings.

How English Versions Use the LXX Without Abandoning the Masoretic Base

Modern English Bibles produced for church use begin with the Masoretic Text and then weigh the LXX alongside the Dead Sea Scrolls, the Samaritan Pentateuch, the Syriac Peshitta, the Aramaic Targums, and the Latin tradition. When editors adopt a Septuagint reading, they do so because it reflects an earlier Hebrew form supported by independent evidence and because it explains how the later Masoretic form arose. When they retain the Masoretic reading, they often footnote the LXX as a meaningful alternative or as a clarifying translation. The process is not guesswork; it is disciplined textual criticism that honors the Hebrew base while welcoming older witnesses.

Translators commonly follow the LXX where early Hebrew copies from the Judean wilderness converge with it. Deuteronomy 32:8 is a standard example: the LXX’s “sons of God” aligns with a Hebrew Pentateuch from the wilderness caves and explains the later Masoretic “sons of Israel.” Deuteronomy 32:43 shows the same pattern at a larger scale, where the LXX preserves lines—including a call for the angels to worship—that are present in early Hebrew but absent in the medieval line; English versions that adopt those lines are not favoring Greek over Hebrew, but restoring earlier Hebrew on the strength of converging witnesses. Genesis 4:8 in the LXX includes Cain’s invitation to Abel, “Let us go out to the field,” with support from the Samaritan Pentateuch and early Hebrew; versions that include the invitation do so because the shorter Masoretic form can be explained as accidental loss. 1 Samuel 14:41 in the LXX preserves a fuller lot-casting formula, matched by an early Hebrew Samuel; rendering the longer wording restores narrative sense without speculation. 1 Samuel 11:1 adds Nahash’s cruel practice in the LXX and an early Hebrew copy, clarifying why the people of Jabesh begged for terms. 1 Samuel 17:4 gives Goliath’s height as “four cubits and a span,” and an early Hebrew Samuel agrees; the taller Masoretic figure can be accounted for by a later scribal slip in numerals. Psalm 145 includes the nun-line in the LXX and an early Hebrew Psalm; English versions that print it respect an acrostic restored by Hebrew–Greek convergence. Isaiah 53:11 reads “He shall see light” in the LXX with early Hebrew support; the restored noun strengthens the resurrection-vindication already evident in context.

At other points, English versions retain the Masoretic consonants while letting the LXX help readers hear the sense. Psalm 8:2 in the LXX reads “You prepared praise,” a faithful interpretation of the Hebrew “You established strength.” Because Jesus Himself cites the Greek in public, many English translations footnote “praise” as a valid rendering; yet they keep the Hebrew base in the main line because there is no textual difference to emend. Psalm 40:6’s “Ears You have dug for me” appears in the LXX as “A body You prepared for me,” a broader, interpretive rendering that conveys the same obedience-theme and that the New Testament uses to expound the Messiah’s total submission. English versions therefore explain both phrasings without rewriting the Hebrew.

English translations also learn from the LXX how to handle idioms. “Answering, he said,” “to lift the eyes,” “to harden the heart,” “to find favor in the eyes of,” and “to go in to” are Hebraisms the LXX often calques into Greek. Translators who retain the idiom in English and explain it, rather than flattening it into bland paraphrase, are following the LXX’s sober approach to preserving Hebrew voice.

Famous Case Windows: Where English Bibles Flag the LXX in Notes and Margins

Readers of careful English versions will often find footnotes such as “Dead Sea Scrolls and LXX read…” or “Compare LXX.” These notes are not signals of uncertainty; they reflect transparency in the restoration process. Deuteronomy 32:43 is frequently footnoted or printed in full because the evidence is strong. The same is true of Psalm 22:16, where “they pierced my hands and feet” is supported by the LXX and an early Hebrew reading; the Masoretic “like a lion” has often been explained as a later distortion or as a rare form. English versions that adopt “pierced” are not privileging the LXX as such; they are choosing a reading witnessed by early Hebrew and by the Greek translation made from early Hebrew. Jeremiah’s shorter Greek edition, now known to reflect a shorter Hebrew arrangement, is often noted in prefaces and study helps; English versions that translate the longer Masoretic arrangement still acknowledge the early existence of a differently ordered Hebrew edition. These examples illustrate the principle that governs sober editorial practice: the Masoretic Text is the base, and the LXX is weighed with other ancient witnesses; where the LXX converges with early Hebrew against later medieval forms, it carries decisive weight; where it simply renders the same Hebrew meaning in different words, it clarifies without moving the base.

When Translators Do Not Follow the LXX—and Why That Is Right

Many well-known LXX–MT differences are translational rather than textual and should not alter the Hebrew line in modern versions. The LXX’s freer passages in Job compress dense poetry for hearers; Proverbs often replaces rare Hebrew terms with common Greek moral vocabulary; Daniel circulates in Christian copying chiefly in Theodotion’s revision, not the Old Greek, because Theodotion tracked the Hebrew/Aramaic more closely. In historical books where the Greek adds small harmonizations to a parallel text, editors rightly keep the Masoretic reading unless early Hebrew confirms the plus. The translator’s commitment to the Hebrew base means that Greek differences are welcomed as commentary but not elevated to textual authority unless the witnesses converge.

The Septuagint’s Influence on the Old Testament Canon—and Why the Hebrew Canon Remains the Standard

The Hebrew canon comprises the Law, the Prophets, and the Writings—twenty-four books in Jewish counting that correspond to the thirty-nine-book arrangement familiar in many Christian tables. Anchored in the history of Israel’s Scripture from Moses (Exodus 1446 B.C.E.) through the monarchy (1010–931 B.C.E.), the exiles (722 and 587 B.C.E.), the return (beginning 537 B.C.E.), and the close of the prophetic voice, the Hebrew canon was the Bible of Jesus and the Apostles. When they speak of “the Law and the Prophets” or refer to “the Law of Moses and the Prophets and the Psalms,” they are indexing that threefold Hebrew arrangement. The Septuagint, as a library for Greek-reading Jews, gathered the Hebrew books in Greek translation and also bound together other Jewish literature written or preserved in Greek, including histories, wisdom collections, prayers, and expansions to canonical narratives. Because the church inherited its Scriptures in Greek in many regions, that wider bookshelf influenced later Christian canons, especially where the Greek Bible was the daily liturgical Bible.

Acknowledging the LXX’s bookshelf does not require equating the added books with the Hebrew canon. The added literature had wide synagogue presence and later church use; it also has a different textual profile and stands outside the Hebrew line received and guarded in Jewish practice. It contains prayers, edifying stories, and historical records that informed piety in some communities; it does not stand on the same canonical footing as the Law, the Prophets, and the Writings in Hebrew. Responsible English Bibles that include this literature often label it clearly, place it between the Testaments, and distinguish its status. That editorial clarity respects the history: Jews preserved the twenty-four-book Hebrew canon; the church in some traditions adopted a larger liturgical corpus because it read the Scriptures in Greek; careful teachers today explain both realities while giving the Masoretic Hebrew canon its proper primacy.

The Septuagint’s Order and Shape: How Arrangement Affected Christian Reading

The LXX’s ordering of books and internal arrangements also shaped Christian reading habits. Jeremiah’s shorter, differently ordered Greek edition circulated alongside the longer Hebrew form and influenced the way early readers experienced the prophet’s sermons; later Hebrew arrangement became standard in Jewish and many Christian contexts, while scholarly editions recognize the early existence of both. Daniel’s Old Greek was widely copied but eventually yielded to Theodotion’s more Hebraizing Greek in Christian codices, shaping how Daniel sounded in Greek for centuries. Esther’s Greek text includes expansions that are edifying prayers and narrative detail; Jewish and Protestant canons distinguish these additions from the Hebrew Esther, while some Christian traditions read the additions as part of the liturgical Bible. The impact is not only theoretical; it shaped catechesis and preaching. Today, translators and pastors who understand the ordering and growth of Greek transmission can explain differences of arrangement with confidence and without confusion.

Modern Translation Projects Focused on the LXX: NETS, LES, and the Orthodox Study Bible

Modern projects dedicated to the Septuagint serve different audiences and aims. A clear overview helps pastors and students choose wisely.

The New English Translation of the Septuagint (NETS) presents an English translation of the LXX with the explicit goal of helping readers see both the translators’ Greek and its relation to the underlying Hebrew. Its renderings often track the distinctive translator profile of each book while using a contemporary literary register. Because NETS aims to show how Greek translators handled the Hebrew, it is a fine tool for comparing the LXX and the Masoretic Text in a particular passage. Teachers can read the Hebrew base, consult the LXX in a critical Greek text, and then check NETS to see how a careful English rendering of that Greek sounds when set beside modern English translations of the Masoretic Text.

The Lexham English Septuagint (LES) supplies a readable English translation of the LXX designed for daily study and comparison. LES maintains a sober English style that mirrors the LXX’s Hebraized Greek where practical and clarifies idioms where needed. It pairs well with interlinear tools for readers who are beginning to track Greek–Hebrew correspondences. Because LES is published with study technology in mind, it helps pastors visualize consistent LXX equivalents for covenant terms and repeated formulas across the canon.

The Orthodox Study Bible (OSB), used widely in Orthodox churches, presents the Old Testament from the LXX for liturgical and devotional reading, with study notes from within that ecclesial tradition. The project’s aim is pastoral rather than technical; it gives English readers a church-centered Old Testament that matches the lectionary and hymnography, and it reflects long-standing Orthodox reception of the LXX in worship. For students of textual criticism, OSB is not a critical apparatus; for those serving Orthodox congregations, it represents how the LXX functions as the default Old Testament in that setting.

These projects have different purposes. NETS foregrounds translation technique; LES balances readability with close alignment to the Greek; OSB serves liturgical life in a tradition where the LXX is the canonical Old Testament. Each can be used profitably if expectations are set correctly. Pastors and seminary students who wish to weigh textual decisions should pair a critical Hebrew Bible (BHQ or BHS), a critical LXX (Rahlfs–Hanhart or Göttingen where available), and an English LXX such as NETS or LES, using OSB to understand how the Old Testament is heard in Orthodox worship.

How LXX Projects Interface with Hebrew-Based English Bibles in the Study Workflow

In real study, a translator or preacher begins with the Hebrew text and notes a difficulty, a rare word, or a textual footnote. The next step is to check the LXX in a critical Greek edition and then consult NETS or LES to hear the Greek in English. If the Greek differs substantially from the Masoretic Text, the question becomes whether the difference is textual or translational. A book’s translator profile often answers that question. Genesis–Deuteronomy are literal and consistent; Isaiah’s translator uses elevated Greek in oracles while keeping covenant vocabulary locked; Job’s Old Greek compresses poetry; Proverbs prizes clarity; Daniel’s Greek exists in Old Greek and Theodotion. If the difference could arise from translation technique, keep the Masoretic reading and teach the sense with help from the LXX. If the difference likely reflects a different Hebrew Vorlage and early Hebrew manuscripts converge with the Greek, adopt the older Hebrew with confidence and explain it simply. This workflow refuses conjecture when witnesses are sufficient and avoids over-reading when a difference is clearly translational.

The Septuagint’s Lexicon as a Teaching Tool for English Translators

English translators who stabilize covenant vocabulary across the canon owe much to the LXX. Because Jewish translators fixed equivalents—διαθήκη for covenant, νόμος for law, δόξα for glory, δικαιοσύνη for righteousness, ἔλεος for mercy, σωτηρία for salvation—English teams learn to stabilize “covenant,” “law,” “glory,” “righteousness,” “mercy,” and “salvation” across Moses, the Psalms, and the Prophets. Maintaining that stability produces a coherent Bible in English. Where the LXX calques Hebrew idioms into Greek (“to lift the eyes,” “to harden the heart,” “to find favor in the eyes of”), English translators can mirror the same restraint so congregations learn to hear the Bible’s own patterns rather than a modern paraphrase of them. The payoff is pastoral: catechesis, preaching, and public reading can rest on a consistent English lexicon for covenant life.

The Divine Name in Translation Policy Today: Lessons from Jewish Greek Practice

Ancient Jewish Greek manuscripts frequently wrote the Divine Name, JHVH, in Hebrew letters inside Greek lines; later Christian codices used κύριος as a reverential surrogate in Greek. That documentary reality supports a simple translation policy. Where the Hebrew Old Testament writes the Tetragrammaton, English should render “Jehovah.” Where Old Testament “Jehovah” passages are quoted in the Greek New Testament with κύριος, teachers should explain that the Greek uses the conventional surrogate while the Old Testament source names Jehovah explicitly. This practice honors the Hebrew base, fits the earliest Jewish Greek handling of the Name, and clarifies apostolic citation for modern readers.

The LXX and English Renderings with Doctrinal Stakes

Occasionally, English renderings influenced by the LXX are pressed into doctrinal controversy. A classic example is Proverbs 8:22, where the LXX uses a Greek verb “created” in a wisdom poem that opponents later misused to claim that the eternal Son began to exist. Responsible translators and teachers refuse that misuse. They explain the Hebrew semantics, the poetic genre, and the canonical witness to the Son’s eternal relation to the Father. They also show how Athanasius and other teachers used the whole Bible—Law, Prophets, Writings, and Apostolic testimony—to place the LXX’s line inside its rightful context. The lesson is not to distrust the LXX; it is to let the Hebrew govern while using the Greek to illuminate, never to innovate.

Canon, Catechesis, and the Use of LXX-Based English in Churches

Churches that read English Bibles translated from the Hebrew base can still benefit from LXX-based English translations. Reading an English LXX alongside a Hebrew-based English version exposes congregations to the way the Old Testament sounded in Greek when the Apostles wrote. It allows pastors to explain why a New Testament quotation matches the LXX rather than a strictly literal rendering of the Masoretic form, and it helps believers see that both are communicating the same promise in different words. In traditions where the LXX is the received Old Testament, catechesis can draw from the same lexicon the Apostles used in Greek while clarifying points where earlier Hebrew evidence favors a different form; in traditions that read Hebrew-based English, pastors can show the church how early translators carried the Hebrew faithfully into Greek and why modern English sometimes prints restored lines supported by the LXX and early Hebrew.

The LXX as a Guard Against Overconfidence in Late Vocalization

Because the LXX was translated from unvocalized Hebrew centuries before medieval pointing, it often reveals how a consonantal string was read in antiquity. When two vocalizations are possible in a Masoretic form, the LXX sometimes shows which was heard by Jewish translators long before the Masoretes added vowels. English translators can check these spots judiciously: if the LXX’s reading fits biblical Hebrew usage and context and there is no competing early evidence, the LXX’s vocalization can guide the English even while the consonants remain the same. This is not privileging Greek over Hebrew; it is letting early Jewish reading inform later vocalization at precisely those points where the consonants permit more than one option.

A Note on the LXX’s Greek Register and English Style

The LXX’s Koine is simple, formal, and Hebraized. English that imitates its reserve serves Scripture well. Legal passages should keep repeated formulas and fixed terms; narrative should preserve parataxis where possible so that each action stands out in public reading; poetry should maintain parallelism with matching lexemes across lines. Modern LXX projects like NETS and LES model this discipline in English; Hebrew-based English versions can imitate the same steadiness so that cross-translation study remains fruitful.

Practical Counsel for Editors and Pastors Making Footnote Decisions

Editors constantly decide which differences to place in the margins. A helpful rule is to footnote LXX readings where they either reflect older Hebrew supported by early witnesses or where they clarify a line that would be obscure without the note. Avoid crowding the page with minor stylistic differences; use notes where readers gain real light. For pastors, the pulpit policy can be equally simple. Preach the Masoretic base; when a difference affects the argument or illuminates the Gospel in a significant way, briefly explain the LXX reading and why it is or is not adopted in the English text. That candor builds confidence rather than doubt.

The Septuagint and Translation Ethics: No Romance, No Suspicion—Just Weighing

Some modern discussions oscillate between romanticizing the LXX as the “real” Old Testament of the church and treating it with suspicion as a source of doctrinal novelties. Neither posture is warranted. Jewish translators sought to carry the Hebrew into Greek without loss; Jewish revisers tightened alignment to the Hebrew; Christian scribes copied both with reverence. The LXX is a faithful servant to the Hebrew text. English translation that follows the same ethic—Masoretic primacy, careful weighing of early witnesses, sober use of the LXX to clarify and restore—will produce a Bible that is both accurate and teachable.

Chronological Anchors to Keep the Discussion Honest

Fixing the timeline keeps the conversation grounded. The Exodus under Moses occurred in 1446 B.C.E. The united monarchy of David and Solomon ran from 1010–931 B.C.E. Samaria fell in 722 B.C.E.; Jerusalem fell in 587 B.C.E.; and Jews returned beginning in 537 B.C.E. Greek translations began in the 200s B.C.E. and continued across the second and first centuries B.C.E. Jesus ministered in 29–33 C.E., and the New Testament books were written between 49–96 C.E. The Masoretic medieval codices stand many centuries later as the stabilized synagogue text. This simple chronology explains why the LXX, as an early translation from older Hebrew exemplars, sometimes preserves older forms and frequently clarifies meaning, and why the Masoretic Text remains our base: it transmits the stabilized Hebrew with extraordinary precision.

What This Means for Bible Translation Today

Translators today do their best work when they treat the Masoretic Text as the base, the LXX as an early witness to the Hebrew and a guide to meaning, the Judean wilderness manuscripts as independent confirmation, and the ancient versions as secondary supports. English editions should render Jehovah’s Name wherever the Hebrew writes it, stabilize covenant vocabulary in ways that match the LXX’s disciplined lexicon, preserve Hebrew idioms with light explanation, and adopt older Hebrew readings where early witnesses converge. Modern LXX projects like NETS and LES, and pastoral editions like OSB, can all be used wisely within this framework. The outcome is not a compromise between “Hebrew” and “Greek,” but a faithful restoration and communication of the Hebrew Scriptures for the church in our time.

You May Also Enjoy

The Other Translations of the Old Testament and Their Textual Value in Light of the Dead Sea Scrolls

About the Author

CLICK LINKED IMAGE TO VISIT ONLINE STORE

CLICK TO SCROLL THROUGH OUR BOOKS