The LXX Factor in Stealing Your Faith

By Rabbi Moshe Yoseph Koniuchowsky

{Note from Torah of Messiah:  I do NOT endorse all the teachings of this author, the organization to which he belongs, or the book from which this excerpt was obtained.  This individual belongs to what I call a "counterfeit" Messianic group.  I use the term "counterfeit," because he promotes the mystery-Babylon man-god Messiah, which I am convinced is the "antichrist" (replacement Messiah) mentioned in Scripture.

I provide comment where I specifically differ with the author of this article.  Despite my differing opinions in a few areas, I feel this article is important, and I provide it for informational purposes as evidence that the Septuagint (LXX) is NOT the corrupt writing counter missionaries would have you believe it to be.  Also, this article provides evidence that the "Masoretic" Hebrew text, which is upheld as flawless by counter missionaries, is actually, itself, corrupted by Rabbinic edits.

My personal conviction is that the Masoretic texts represent the most accurate set of Tanakh (Old Testament) writings; however, the LXX (Septuagint) translation is also highly regarded.  Having said that, you must understand that ...


A baseball pitcher is considered extremely accurate if he can throw strikes every pitch; however, the "strike zone" is large enough to allow him to be several inches off target yet still be throwing strikes.  What determines "accuracy" is the size of the "strike zone." Regardless of what you may be told, WE DO NOT KNOW WHAT THE "STRIKE ZONE" IS FOR DETERMINING SCRIPTURE ACCURACY!

What do you think determines "accuracy" in Scripture?  Is there a "perfect" original of the Old Testament with which we can determine if the Septuagint or Masoretic texts are accurate?  NO!  THERE ISN'T!  Did you know that?  There is NOT a "perfect" text with which Scriptural accuracy can be determined!  The original Hebrew/Chaldean texts, and even the original Hebrew language, are LONG GONE!

So, how is "accuracy" determined?  Answer: By critical scholarship studies of ALL available manuscript fragments.  There is doubtless not one single scholar that would dare to insanely claim a specific version of the Tanakh (Old Testament) to be a 100 percent perfect recording of the Scripture as it was first written.  When one studies the history of how the Holy Scripture came to us in its present form, it is quickly realized that there is no such thing as a "perfect" Scripture today.  Anyone that thinks otherwise is simply ignorant of the facts and subjecting themselves to wishful thinking.

It is also a fact that scholarly opinion varies in this area, and the definition of the "strike zone" from which "accuracy" is determined is, itself, prone to error and defined by scholarly speculation.

My point is that anyone that claims absolute superiority of the Masoretic text over the Septuagint in all areas is quite simply wrong, since all such determinations are speculative, still being studied, and open for debate!  There was a Hebrew text used to arrive at the Septuagint, which scholars call the "Vorlage," but it is lost to antiquity and likely never will be found.  However, The Qumran texts (Dead Sea Scrolls) and an ancient Samaritan text often support the Septuagint instead of the Masoretic texts.

I will get into more detail in another article.  Just remember that when counter missionaries tell you the New Testament is "faulty" because it quotes from the LXX (Septuagint), THEY ARE LIARS!  The Septuagint was THE most common Tanakh of the first century Roman empire among the Jewish diaspora; therefore, quoting from it would have been the natural thing to do.  The fact that the New Testament includes more quotes from the Septuagint than it does from the current Masoretic text actually SUPPORTS the validity of the New Testament!  THE MASORETIC TEXTS DID NOT EXIST when the New Testament was written.  Counter missionaries deceitfully imply that the New Testament is faulty because quotes from the Tanakh match with the Septuagint, the common Tanakh of the time, instead of the Masoretic text, a Hebrew version of Scripture that did not exists at the time the New Testament was written!  Worst still, counter missionaries know this yet STILL insists use of the Septuagint in the New Testament "proves" it to be illegitimate! ??

Ok.  Enough said for now.  I will most certainly expand upon this in other articles as I expose the shameless deceit of counter missionaries.  Now let us read the article by Moshe Yoseph Koniuchowsky}

Based on the admonition found in Deuteronomy 19:15, all Torah principles MUST be verified with the testimony of 2 or 3 witnesses. The counter-missionary specializes in many avenues of deception. One of the major and more frequently used approaches is the casting of doubt on the validity and veracity of the Septuagint LXX, translated in Alexandra Egypt by 70 Jewish rabbi scholars in circa 250 BCE. Claims of the most sensational, and fictitious nature have been raised and hurled at this document by traditional Jews, who reject Messiah. Their anti-missionary leaders in their main arguments, insist that the current Hebrew Masoretic text meaning traditional or “handed down” text, are the actual documents of the 1st century Judeans, who allegedly received it directly from Ezra the Scribe in 500 BCE! They stake their claim that it is almost infallible, whereas the LXX is allegedly full of mistakes.

Many of you reading this including many Believers, have actually fallen into this same trap. One wonders just why this multi frontal attack on a document that is not in usage much, and is not even referenced much nowadays by Christians or Jews. Its primary usage is by seminary students, and some theologians. All these disparaging statements, and accusations against the Greek LXX, can be solely attributed to one main reason. The integrity and truthfulness of the New Testament is fully dependant on the LXX being a truthful translation. Most of the New Testament quotes from the Old Testament are using the LXX as the primary source. [1]Remove the integrity of the LXX, and you basically have no New Testament. It ceases to exist.[2] Since it is not religiously or politically correct in certain circles to launch such an obviously diabolical frontal attack on the Septuagint, the safer and more stealth method is used. That method has as its primary aim the very undermining of the reliability of the LXX, as the basic foundational document for The New Testament. The attack is without warrant, since we know that the Master Yahshua Himself used the Hebrew original from which the LXX was derived. The apostles also used the LXX, as well as the Hebrew upon which the LXX was derived.[3] The LXX itself predates the first appearance of the Masoretic text by some 950 years, and the Hebrew upon which the LXX is based is at least 1,200 years older than the Masoretic text. The reliable carbon dated Dead Sea Scrolls often agree with the LXX over the Masoretic text according to Dr. Cook.[4]

Is the Masoretic Superior?

The anti-missionary is well versed in the LXX and the Masoretic text, and will go out of his or her way to prove that the correct Hebrew Masoretic text is far more reliable than the LXX. Many who fall from Messianic faith simply take the anti-missionary at his or her word, without actually doing some serious homework. You have heard the lies about the alleged problems with the LXX. Now let us take a fresh look at the true facts, as available through 2 or 3 witnesses. If a position cannot be verified with 2 or 3 valid, and reputable witnesses according to Torah, then it cannot and should not be accepted. All the claims in favor of the superiority of the Masoretic text by anti-missionaries, and traditional Judaism have as many holes as a piece of fine Swiss cheese. The burden of Torah proof rests on the accusers.[5] They need 2 or 3 reliable corroborating documents to lay claim to the validity of their held position. But as you are about to encounter, the witnesses are not available to the counter-missionary viewpoint but are to the Messianic position according to the requirements found in Deut. 19:15. Moreover, as you are about to see, the Masorites were not beyond changing Words, and phrases, to eliminate references to Messiah Yahshua. This editing and redacting is a clear violation of Scripture in Deuteronomy 12:32 and Proverbs 30:6.

· The faulty Masoretic text takes the Word for pierced in Psalm 22:16 (a clear crucifixion Psalm) kaaru and changes the last letter from a vav to a yud. The change of letter, changes the meaning from pierced my hands, and feet, to lion, as in as a lion they are at my hands and feet. The LXX has pierced from the original Hebrew karu not kaari. Who’s right? According to the Dead Sea Scrolls dated 100 or so BCE, the Hebrew Word in verse 16 is kaaru pierced and not lion. Not only that but the Aramaic Peshita also agrees with the LXX. No copy before the altered and doctored Masoretic had lion, leaving the Masoretic as the only witness of its claim, not fulfilling basic Torah requirements of proper testimony.[6]

· Psalm 145:13 is missing entirely in the so-called faultless Masoretic text. The 22 verses are all supposed to be lined up alphabetically according to the Hebrew Aleph-Bet. But the letter and corresponding verse (nun) is missing. How did that happen? But guess what? Here comes the Septuagint to the rescue. The LXX has verse nun and so does the Dead Sea Scrolls manuscript 11Q PS (a). Again we have the required 2 witnesses.[7]

· In Isaiah 53 the so-called flawless Masoretic is missing a key Word in verse 11. After the word “see”, there should be another word qualifying what the Suffering Servant sees. The Masoretic verse 11 is a slick copy and paste job. But the missing word light is found in the LXX, and the Dead Sea Scrolls. Therefore we see the Messiah dying, and the after death, seeing light again by His days being prolonged. By removing the word light after death as in lite or “life after death”, the counter-missionaries have tried unsuccessfully to remove a clear reference to Messiah’s resurrection.[8]

· In such scriptures as Psalm 110:5, Genesis 18:3, 27, 30, 32, Exodus 19:18, 20:4, 34:9, Numbers 14:17, Judges 6:15, Zechariah 9:4, Psalm 2:4, Psalm 130: 2, 3, 6 and about another 118 times for a total of 134, the so-called infallible Masoretic text has altered and erased the name of YHWH, as found in the tetragrammaton![9] In its place they have dastardly substituted “Adonai.” These changes are not only deliberate, they have been done anywhere, and anytime a text may even hint at Messiah being spoken of as the”Lesser YHWH” or Yahshua. Careful study will reveal that Adonai was only substituted for YHWH, in specific instances where it was obvious in any one of the 4 levels of Hebraic PaRDeS that Messiah was presented as a physical corporal manifestation of YHWH Himself. This sin is so grievous and is a blatant violation of the third commandment by bringing His name to naught or nothingness.[10] They will have to answer to Yahweh that is for sure.

Could it be that YHWH had the New Testament writers use the Hebrew upon which the LXX was based, so as to avoid all these grievous sins of the Masoretic scribes? We know from history that the Jews in Jerusalem used a Jerusalem Hebrew text, which differed substantially from the LXX, and may have been the origins of the Masoretic text. We also know that Jewish leaders put a ban on the true Name in approximately 300 BCE and its safe to assume that the Hebrew Jerusalem text which became the Masoretic handed down text, included all the times YHWH’s Name was removed, taken away, and thus brought to naught.[11]

· In the Dead Sea Scrolls by Vander Kamp, p.36, Cave 2, it is recorded that the manuscripts contain Psalm 151. Psalm 151 you said? Yes. Does your Masoretic text contain Psalm 151? Even most Christian Old Testament translations are based on the so-called flawless Masoretic text. It is funny but not surprising how the anti-missionaries don’t tell you this![12]

· Exodus 1:5 states that 70 souls came to Egypt from Canaan. But the LXX and Dead Sea Scroll say 75 souls. The Masoretic text is wrong again! Many Masoretic texts have been altered or removed to hide Messianic references that it is no great surprise why parts of the New Testament don’t seem to fit parts of the Old Testament. Let me ask a question. Would you, the reader, rather use Yahshua's version of the Hebrew, which was the basis for the LXX translation, or would you rather use the anti-missionaries “spin zone edition”, which is a decent work but did not come from Sinai, my friend. Acts 7:14 confirms Exodus 1:5 in the LXX. If you believe the New Testament to be inspired by YHWH, then you will have to believe that He led them to use and quote the LXX rather than the existing Jerusalem Hebrew version of the Tanach in the 1st century, knowing that the LXX was more reliable at that time.[13]

· In Genesis 10:24 the so-called perfect Masoretic text is missing generations. The New Testament in Luke 3:36 inserts Cainan as does the LXX and the Dead Sea Scrolls, leaving 3 biblical witnesses against one. What happened to the perfect genealogies that the Masoretic Old Testament claimed to preserve all the while ripping apart Matthew’s and Luke’s genealogy?[14]

· The Masoretic text serves as its own witness. It has no proven connection at all to any 1st century Sanhedrin accrediting. It is a compilation of the rabbis of the Middle Ages who were not accountable to any body of theological authority. Seventy outstanding Hebrew scholars on the other hand, translated the LXX, with the full approval and recommendation of the High Priest, before Yahshua was even born. the LXX was finished even before the so-called Christian Era began! These 70 Jewish rabbis had no axe to grind, and no agenda either pro or con, as pertaining to Yahshua as Messiah. They translated as 70 Jewish rabbis, with direct recommendation from Israel’s High Priest, and Israel’s Sanhedrin. The High Priest therefore knew and approved the Hebrew original from which the LXX was derived. Then of course, Yahshua Himself approved of the LXX. Finally the Hebrew from which the LXX was derived is approximately 900 years older than the first “official” Masoretic edition, leaving less time for unintentional scribal error.[15]

· In Deuteronomy 32:8 the so-called infallible Masoretic text uses the term “children of Israel.” The LXX uses the term “Angels Of Elohim” as do the Dead Sea Scrolls (Dead Sea Scrolls Today Vander Kamp)[16]as opposed to the term “the children of Israel.” The term “the children of Israel” makes no sense, since the “children of Israel” did not exist at the time YHWH divided the nations back in Genesis 10:25 when Jacob hadn’t even been born! But as we know, YHWH assigns angels over every nation, a practice s.a.tan has also mimicked. Angels were around from the dawn of creation. Now that makes sense.

· Jeremiah 10 verses 6 and 7 have been added in the Masoretic, and clearly do not fit the literal context as the subject matter changes for these two verses. In the LXX and Dead Sea Scrolls these verses are not found and Jeremiah 10, and in those editions makes perfect sense.[17]

· A verse in Ezra referring to the “Passover as Our Savior” is missing in the Masoretic, and later LXX manuscripts. It was originally there as verified by the Dead Sea Scrolls.[18]

· According to several “church” historians like Origen and others, Psalm 96:10 in the Jerusalem Hebrew manuscripts around in the 1st century CE read as follows: “Say among the nations, YHWH reigns from the wood,” a clear reference to the crucifixion, and power of Messiah’s vicarious death on our behalf. Today in the supposed traditional handed down Masoretic, these Words are missing, as they are in most Christian bibles, since most Christian bibles sadly use the Old Testament Masoretic as a base source.[19]

· The Masoritic scribes in a subtle and veiled attempt to keep divine worship, and Jewish law making in the hands of a select few rabbis, made a subtle but key change to a text from Isaiah. Sworn to oppose anything non-Hebraic, or approved by Jerusalem, the Masorites changed the text of Isaiah 19:18 so as to make it appear that YHWH would never allow or approve any Old Testament text outside of Hebrew. This clever manipulation can be seen in looking at the original verse in Isaiah 19:18.

“On that day there shall be five cities in the land of Egypt, speaking the language of Canaan, and swearing by YHWH of Hosts and one shall be called the city of righteousness” However in the Masoretic text the phrase "city of righteousness" was changed to the “city of the sun” or in some versions “the city of destruction.”[20]

What would be the motive? Well we know that righteous Jews from the land of Canaan, whose forefathers originally spoke the native tongue of Hebrew, undertook the idea of the LXX by seeking translators to do the work. From these Jewish communities of Egypt, came forth the righteous desire to translate the Hebrew Tanach into Greek for the righteous Jews in the righteous Jewish community of Alexandria Egypt. In order to remove what many felt to be a clear reference to the commissioning and legitimacy of the LXX, this alteration was done. Moreover the 7th century Masorites, desired to remove the very notion that righteous Jews living outside of Jerusalem were willing to study Torah, outside of the direct authority of the men of the Great Assembly/Sanhedrin. Therefore today we have the phrase “city of the sun” rather than "city of righteousness", which may well be a clear reference to Jewish exiles in the city of Alexandria Egypt around the time of the 3rd century BCE.[21]

The irony of this situation is that not only did the rabbis change the scripture but they also ignored their own history. History is clear that the men of The Great Assembly, along with the High Priest of Israel, all gave their approval to the project that became the LXX. In hiding this verse from its true context, they have been found guilty of changing both the Word of YHWH, along with recorded history.

The Masoretic scribes purposely and willfully rearranged the original chapter order in the prophetic Book Of Daniel, so that the chapters make no sense chronologically. This was done so that a clear time sequence could not be ascertained from Daniel that would prove that Yahshua was the Messiah. If we were to rearrange the chapters in chronological order, the entire book would be far more comprehendible like the Book of Revelation. This deed is a willful manipulation of chronology, in order to hide the clear fact that Messiah had to come at a specific point in time, and did just as He was prophesied to do.

· In Isaiah 61:1 the Masoretic does not contain the phrase “recovery of sight to the blind.” Yet Luke 4:18 does as does the LXX. Obviously Yahshua is being quoted in Luke 4:18 as He quotes from Isaiah. Now either Yahshua couldn’t read properly or He read from the Hebrew on which the LXX was based. I don’t know about you but for me it is easier to trust Yahshua than those who have hidden the Father’s Name 137 times in the so-called infallible Masoretic text. The more we examine the deception of the counter-missionaries, the more it becomes clear that the Masoretic text is really a traditional Jewish project written or updated in the Middle Ages, and used to evangelize people away from the true Messiah and the Father’s true Name.[22]

· In Psalm 40:6 the Masoretic text (Psalm 40:7 in the Stone Edition)[23] has purposely changed the phrase “a body” you have prepared for me”, as properly quoted again in Hebrews 10:5, and verified by the Dead Sea Scrolls. This verse speaks of a man who has a special body prepared for Him by YHWH, to come to earth because the scrolls of Torah testify of Him! Now if you were a Masoretic counter-missionary evangelist, you’d want this verse tampered with also. That is exactly what they did. They changed Psalm 40:6 to “you opened my ears.” What does open ears have to do with a person coming in a prepared body?[24]

· In the Torah in Deuteronomy 32:43, there is another verse missing from the Torah, but perfectly quoted in the New Testament from the LXX. Why do you think it is missing? Lets take a look and see. It says in Hebrews 1:6 “And when He again brings the Firstborn into the world, He says ‘Let all the messengers of Elohim worship Him.’” Hmmm. The deceptive pattern here is interesting! Deuteronomy 32:43, is found in the Aramaic Peshitta as Psalms 97:7, and in the New Testament, as a verse that speaks of worshipping the Firstborn Son of YHWH! Sounds like the “Masoretic evangelists” have been doing some serious editing. Is it any shock that having rejected the living Word Yahshua, the counter-missionaries also rejected the revealed written Word in sections they did not care for? As Yahshua Himself scolded them when He said, “FOR IF you had believed Moses, you would have believed me, since He wrote about me. But if you do not believe his writings, how shall you believe my Words?”[25] [26] [27]

· In the Masoretic text the term in Genesis 4:8 is missing this phrase “Let us go into the field”, uttered by Cain to Abel. This phrase is maintained in the LXX.[28] [29]

· The Masoretic text does not have the full version of Moses Song in Deuteronomy 32:43. The LXX and Dead Sea Scroll have it.[30]

· In the Masoretic version of Isaiah 53 there are 10 spelling differences, 4 stylistic changes and 3 missing letters for light in verse 11, for a total of 17 differences between the Masoretic and the Dead Sea Scrolls 1Qlsb.[31]

· The Masoretic text uses almah in Isaiah 7:14 which means virgin, but then denies the virgin birth in spite of this word almah, claiming that betulah ought to have been used as if they have right to instruct YHWH. But the LXX translates this as parthenos, which mean untouched virgin woman. The Aramaic Peshitta confirms the LXX with betulah, another synonymous clear Aramaic/Hebrew word for virgin. As opposed to the Masoretic, the LXX is crystal clear with no ambiguity among the 70 rabbis who did the work in Alexandria.[32]  {Note from Torah of Messiah: Isaiah 7:14 does NOT provide proof of the "virgin birth."  For further insight please read the article linked to HERE in which that topic is discussed.}

· Another point of note is that Psalms is by far the most quoted Old Testament book quoted in the New Testament. “Strangely” enough, the Masoretic version of Psalms is the most doctored book. In Psalm 110:5 where it originally said YHWH at thy right hand,[33] and changed it to “Adonai at your right hand” to eliminate the “Lesser YHWH” and to eliminate any connection to Yahshua who claimed to be YHWH come in the flesh.[34] {Note from Torah of Messiah: Yahshua NEVER claimed to be YHWH come in the flesh. NEVER! And we show all throughout this web site how tragically wrong such a belief, as expressed by the author, is.}

· The Masoretic text added vowel pointing in the late 700s to “help” pronounce Hebrew Words the way they thought it should be pronounced. Apparently they know a tad more than YHWH, who didn’t feel the need to give any vowel pointing under the original Words and consonants. By adding vowels, they could turn any word upside down, without changing the written consonants by getting the reader to pronounce the word the way they felt it originally was pronounced. Every time a Hebrew word is pronounced when reading the Masoretic text, we are merely repeating the opinion of the Masorites, as to the pronunciation of a word. Therefore the very comprehension of Words derived from the Masoretic text is therefore suspect. We also know, by their own admission, that the vowel points were added to the Tetragrammaton YHWH, not to assist, but rather to hinder the correct pronunciation. When Masoretic vowel points are used YHWH comes out as Jah Ho VA!! Hmmm. Where have we heard that before? As to the origin of Masoretic vowel pointing, general scholarship is most certain that it was borrowed by the Masoretic anti-missionaries, from Syriac, and Moslem influences of the Middle Ages. The actual vowel pointing and subsequent word vocalization of modern Hebrew comes in large part from the borrowed method of preserving correct Arabic pronunciation! Don’t you see the irony in Jews trusting in a Moslem method of vocalization?[35]

· Due to this borrowing of the vowel pointing, many Words today we pronounce one way don’t resemble the paleo/ancient vocalization of years gone by. Thus we have no sure way of knowing that we are pronouncing any of the Hebrew Words correctly. It is possible that much of the vocalization based on Masoretic vowel pointing has no resemblance whatsoever to original usage. Are these the kind of folks you can really trust to handle YHWH’s Word, and tell you if Messiah has come? Or do we trust in YHWH, and His Word, as preserved in the original manuscripts but not available today? We must trust in YHWH alone and His Son alone.[36]

· The anti-missionaries attribute the origins of the current Masoretic text to Ezra the scribe in circa 500 BCE, along with the latter men of the Great Assembly i.e., the Sanhedrin under the supposed inspiration of the Set-Apart Spirit and thus supposedly free from any and all error. Not only has this assertion proven untrue, but it has been proven that the Masoretic text complied in the middle ages around 800 CE, was based most probably on the work of Rabbi Akiva, he of the false prophet variety. Akiva proclaimed Bar Kochba as Messiah in 130 CE, and as an early leading anti-missionary, caused thousands of Jews to die needlessly at the hands of Rome by fighting, after Yahshua had told them to run and escape, and not fight. It was his school that gathered together a Hebrew text upon which perhaps, the later Masoretic text is based, in order to counteract the growing Messianic Nazarene sect, and their use of the LXX. But Rabbi Akiva lived 500-600 years after Ezra. The anti-missionary claim that Ezra is probably the actual editor of the current Masoretic text is blatantly false.[37]

· The anti-missionaries claim that since the New Testament is based on the Greek LXX, with over 5,000 differing manuscripts, that the Masoretic is more reliable. What they have not told you is that the Masoretic itself is a compilation from some 3,400 rolls and codices according to De Rossi, with variances from scroll to scroll. According to De Rossi[38] and others, the famed Rabbi Akiva, who proclaimed Bar Kochba as the false Messiah in 135 CE, did the original Masoretic compilation, and certainly not Ezra.[39]

Perfectly Fine Until Yahshua

Now lets further consider the many advantages of the LXX Greek Septuagint. Greek has and always did have both vowels and consonants, and did not need added Moslem vowel pointing. Therefore we can surmise that today’s Greek is pronounced much like paleo Greek or Koine Greek, the common Greek, used at the time of Messiah. We can be reasonably sure the Greek hasn't changed, and neither has the LXX's pronunciation.

Obviously the same cannot be said for the “Masoretic Evangelism” text, designed intentionally in too large a measure for my comfort, to draw you away from your Savior. Its main purpose is to drive you into the flawed and dangerous arms of the rabbis, as they mold you, and make you into a traditional Jew. At that point you most likely will be following the traditional or Masoretic text only. The Masoretic text is a text that has bent over backwards to deny Yahshua as Messiah. Its fanatical adherents are akin to the Born Again Christian extremists, who believe that YHWH gave the King James 1611 CE Bible in English at Mt Sinai. The Masorites represent a similar fanaticism.

Keep in mind that for hundreds of years the LXX was used by Jews in and out of the land. There was no controversy about the integrity of the texts. However the whispers and false accusations started after Yahshua of Nazareth had fulfilled His mission, and only after it was learned by unbelieving Jews that the New Testament relied heavily on the Greek LXX, and its Hebrew derivative.[40] The fact that from 250 BCE to 135 CE the LXX was unchallenged in its authenticity, speaks volumes to all truth seeking men and women. By the time of the advent of popery and Constantine in 325 CE, there were so many copies of the LXX in the Greek-speaking world, that if there were any major problems with it, it would have experienced a decline rather than proliferation in its usage.

Since the New Testament agrees with the LXX version 97% of the time, as opposed to siding with the Masoretic text 68% of the time,[41] you’d expect that anti-missionaries would begin their smear campaign against the inspiration of the New Testament by an assault on the LXX. Sadly that same anti-Messiah spirit was around in 135 CE, and is increasing in these last days. According to First John, a lying spirit can be identified and exposed, if they deny the Father, and the Son or the Greater and Lesser YHWH (see Addendum II at the end of the book). That is the spirit that motivates the bombardment of the veracity of the LXX, as is recorded in First John 4:3, which reminds us that any spirit or man that denies that Yahshua came in the flesh or that Yah Himself came in the flesh, is an anti-Messiah spirit, that was already at work in John’s time.

Rabbi Akiva’s Anti-Missionary Response To The LXX

The LXX was so powerfully authoritative at the time of the first century CE, that non-believing Jews, including anti-missionaries, started questioning its accuracy, since they had no options left to belittle Yahshua’s Messianic claims. The authority of the LXX was so widely established in Judea and the exile communities, that around 95 CE, the legendary Rabbi Akiva who proclaimed Bar Kochba as false Messiah, commissioned a Jewish proselyte to Judaism named Aquila to translate a Hebrew to Greek text more favorable the anti-Yahshua views of traditional Jews. This text became popular among the Beth Hillel/School Of Hillel, to offset massive movements of Jews to the Nazarenes, due in large part to the validity of the LXX.[42] Aquila’s Masoretic Greek translation was written for the “express purpose of opposing the authority of the LXX.”[43] Not surprisingly, Benton describes the work as “a bold literality of rendering,” meaning a hyper-literal translation, so as to make the Masoretic Greek commissioned by Rabbi Akiva appear to be vastly different from the more liberal Greek LXX handling of Old Testament prophetic fulfillments. In this manner Jews began to question the “literal validity of their own 70 rabbis.”[44]

One has to wonder out loud that if Rabbi Akivah was wrong about the Messiah being Bar Kochbah, on what authority would he and his disciple Aquila have for identifying the “true Messiah” from the first century Jerusalem Hebrew text, let alone from their “in-house” new Greek translation. It is very possible if not highly probable, that the Jewish Masoretic text that appeared in the late 700’s CE came from Aquila’s Greek anti-missionary response to the Septuagint. In this Greek translation for example, the LXX rendering of parthenos in Isaiah 7:14, was changed to “young woman”, another word in the Greek.

The truth of the matter is that the LXX is unmatched in modern criticism. The Letter of Aristeas (called a fraud by anti-missionaries) is repeated verbatim by Josephus Flavius, and by Philo both Jewish non-believers as being historically accurate.[45] In that historical letter, Aristeas provides great detail to both the backdrop for the commissioning of the 70 rabbinic scholars, as well as the methods, details, and results of their translations. He insists that all of the Tanach was translated, not just the Torah, as the anti-missionaries now have insisted. The anti-missionary still insists that the prophets were translated into Greek much after the Torah so as to make Yahshua look more favorable. But all three Aristeas, Josephus and Philo, all attribute the translation of the LXX in 250 BCE as being the entire Tanach, and not just the Torah. As a matter of historical record the authenticity of the Letter of Aristeas was not even questioned until 1540 CE by a man named Louis Vives, and more recently by others, especially by counter-missionaries in their new found zeal and concern for many Jews believing in Yahshua since 1967 CE.

These are the facts. For more help go to:


YHWH Doesn’t Speak Greek

Finally the anti-missionaries claim that if the New Testament was inspired, the writers would have used a Hebrew based copy, and not a Greek based copy like the LXX for their project. Two points are in order in that regard.

First Rabbi Akivah spoke, read and utilized a Hebrew original rather than a Greek text like the LXX, and he still declared Bar Kochba to be Messiah. Rabbi Hillel, Akiva's teacher also used “Hebrew only manuscripts” and not the LXX, and that still did not stop him from touting HEZEKIAH as the “Eternal Father” of Isaiah 9:6, and a proven pretender to the throne of King Messiah! {Note from Torah of Messiah: Isaiah 9:6 is often used a "proof" of Messiah's deity.  It provides no such proof.  If you wish further information, contact us.}

Other Jews who read perfect Hebrew through the many centuries made at least 68 official declarations that Messiah had arrived. All were found to be false messiahs, the latest being Menachem Mendal Schneerson the Lubavitcher rebbe, whose followers all spoke Hebrew. That did not help anyone from missing the real Mc Cohen and embracing proven false messiahs like Shavtai Zvi the false Messiah from Europe, who later converted to Islam. All his followers all spoke and used Hebrew based texts.

Isn’t it ironic that the most used Biblical text in JEWISH history, “ALLEGEDLY” having a track record dating back to the First Century c.e., is what’s known today as the Masoretic Text, a text used to proclaim not one, not Two, not three, but 68 plus false Jewish messiahs!! One can only imagine how many more will be coming forth based on the so-called preserved and true text.

The little known and much maligned LXX on the other hand, was only used to proclaim one Messiah, and was never used to prove or proclaim any other one! The ways and wonders of YHWH are truly marvelous in our eyes.

The second point is that even much of the so-called traditional Masoretic text contains large portions of Aramaic and even Chaldean as in the Book of Daniel and Ezra. Does the Chaldean and Aramaic sections mean that the Book of Daniel was not inspired by YHWH? The accusation by the anti-missionaries that all of a sudden Hebrew was not “good enough” is an empty headed allegation. It was never a question of what language was “good enough” but simply what YHWH allowed and permitted. If parts of Daniel can be written in Chaldean and Aramaic, and still be considered inspired by Jews, then certainly the Greek LXX can also be considered to be likewise a legitimate basis for the inspired New Testament.

Let this handbook guide you away from the errors and tricks of those who desire you to follow them, and let the truths contained herein keep you close to Yahshua, and Him alone, as you renew your allegiance to the Lamb of Israel, and the Savior of this passing world.

[1] Grant R. Jones

[2] Ibid.

[3] Ibid.

[4] Dr. Cook "A Pre Masoretic Biblical Papyrus” Society of Bible Archeology, Jan 1903

[5] Wurthein The Dead Sea Scrolls p.31 The scrolls have several variants from the Masoretic.

[6] Dr. James Trimm Personal Correspondence 12/20/02

[7] Grant R. Jones


[9] According to non Messianic Jewish scholar CD Ginsburg 19th century Mesorah

[10] Shavah, nought, Strongs H #7723 emptiness, nothingness

[11] “The Word Of Yahweh” Eaton Rapids Michigan Preface p. vii

[12] The Dead Sea Scrolls And The LXX William Dankenbring

[13] Ibid.

[14] Ibid.

[15] Dr Immanuel Tov Hebrew University Jerusalem “ The Dead Sea Scrolls differ in many details from the MT” Oxford Companion Bible Introduction.

[16] Dead Sea Scrolls And The LXX William Dankenbring

[17] Ibid.

[18] Ibid.

[19] Ibid.

[20] The Holy Name Bible Scripture Research Association 1971 Preface p. iv

[21] The Holy Name Bible Scripture Research Association 1971 Preface p. iv

[22] and Dr. James Trimm Personal Correspondence 12/20/02

[23] Stone Edition Mesorah p. 1470


[25] HRV Trimm p.511 note 1456

[26] John 5:46-47


[28] The Septuagint With Apocrypha Benton June 2001 p. 5


[30] IBID P.277

[31] Masoretic Text (Geisler and Nix 1986 p. 382)

[32] HRV Trimm p.3 & The Septuagint With Apocrypha Benton June 2001 p.842

[33] Messiah Ben Mordechai Vol. 3 p.96

[34] Ibid.

[35] F Bhul The Masoretic Text as forwarded from

[36] IBID

[37] Dr Immanuel Tov Hebrew University Jerusalem “The Dead Sea Scrolls differ in many details from the MT” Oxford Companion Bible Introduction

[38] De Rossi Variae Lectiones Vet. Test vol. I p. 15

[39] Dr Immanuel Tov Hebrew University Jerusalem “ The Dead Sea Scrolls differ in many details from the MT” Oxford Companion Bible Introduction


[41] Grant R. Jones

[42] The Septuagint With Apocrypha Benton June 2001 Ninth printing Introduction p. 5

[43] Ibid.

[44] IBID


BACK to Counter Missionary Articles