New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1892-02-01
THE SFPTrIGINT And ASPIRATION
ur trrrcr OF NEW TESTAMENT QUOTATION

THE frFECr OF NEW TESTAMENT QUOTATION
ox DocTmNAL QUESTION.
TO the Editor of The Tribune.
sir: In Dr. Ecmcusnydcr's reply TO my criticism UP n
nj. atclpnt that our Lord quoted the exact W"id
~ tln Old Tc-tancut IN His contest with satan, inc
Doctor admits That Lord I'D not quote ia" "rSh'l
Hebrew ulble but the current jewish scripture, the
Greek -cptuagin I'm use by ~, hearers am glad 80
SEQ iii, Correction for the rpuagn WAS not referred
TO an the report II the Doctor, sermon. and the Eltor
II The Tribune stated that tie report was correct -
appear, from q comparison with DR.. Rcncnsi}d'i ="
manuscript
II those who preach on the subject of Christ and
the Apostles quotations from the old Testament VIII
be careful 10 tell their hearers that the quota
tons do not attempt to follow the exact
Hebrew, but are. ~ n rule. from a free. nn-
literal extremely faulty translation a, Oh" Scptul
gint j, known 10 be- they may we'll leave the debate
on verbal Inspiration to the commonecn,' Judgment
II their hearers. am that they viii be inclined
10 say "A method Of using scripture which was sat
isactOry To Christ and Ills Apostles Ia ca'hih- INC
truth good enough for Us who sit At their Ice' As
learners" And no doubt the people will wonder WHY
their pastor insists inc necessity OF something else
Er Il. seems 10 feel the hazard # leaving the mat
ter there and venture, this statement: "Nhe'' ohf
Lord used this version ScpiuagnU lie set the sen OF
in praon on it, This sentence may nave cl'IPr 81
two meanings. II may mean that Christ recognized
the septlacint a, an inspired book, or. that lie put
Inspiration into these passages Of the SeptuaEht 10y
quoting them Either in expectation seems 10 M Id'ai
the contention OF those who would thus prove YER
bal iuspimtion If the Scpuagnt were already IN
,pircd in its language then there were two BlDcs-thc
Hebrew ana the Scptuagnt- differing widely i'll ueIr
language and IN their detailed idca-, ana agreeing
only In their general Thoughts What then btc)mc' oil
The statement that Inspiration must Hc' not III me
thought bat in the exact vcrbagc The other horn OF
t,r lg,e
which Christ quoted not inspired until His quo ing
them made Them so what becomes of the statement
That He quoted Inspired words If ! should d''l!c
that picked up warm stone, conu Neihy my
words If admitted that the stone was coli before
picked IL up and that II became warm ohy Win I'M
warmth Of my hand Can We wonder That tlcr' Is
loud dissent from this Of logic 10 which the nd
vocatc, Of the verbal theory driven by the necs-
sites Of their case!
Tie admission ol Dr. f.. !, only an entering wedge.
oar Lord also quoted from another translation, which
was largely used in Palestine the now lost Arllnhc
vcI-ion-wlch differed "a language ana III me ch'Ire
shaping of Its rhetoric from both the Hebfe" ana inc
scpuagnt There wcr then, three bibles unlike ~
all J., poets except Che general thought Did their IN
spaOn lodge at the points III wmch 'hcy u'lcF'"' VI
in the points Of their agreement
Further the Hebrew Bible. We have II, had in the
time ~ tie Apostles dropped entirely ON OF the us
% tie Church. The Apostles made no a'Wmpl 10 ~
introduce IL. The Bible which Timothy had wa u1'
scptuaelut. and that rot limited to passages Whlch
mist had sealed with Ills inspiration by quoting them
but the scp;iagint a. whole, which the Church has
since Discarded a. lncompaelby inferior 10 the Hebrew
Bible for accuracy. Yet 1t wa OF tins translation that
Paul used the famous savings IN his EplSic 10 lmctF
sicrcd writings Able 10 MAKE thce Wise uh'o st'
yatiOn.T Given Ly inspiration proh'apie' tat tle
Of G6d may he completely furnished unto all good
works Now. II the literal Bible alone bc inspired,
what become, of p,uls word. and OF Apostolic USAGE.
The early Church had no literal ola Testament
Scriptures for three centuries Jerome In preparing
his Latin yulcate WINS the first to 60 back to the text
Of the Hebrew If the liteli'Is are correct Christians
then had inspired old Testament during those early
ON this theory. the modern Church has infallble