Uncovering Influences

Not like the covenant which I made with their fathers on the day when I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt; for they did not continue in my covenant, and I did not care for them, says the Lord.  Hebrews 8:9

Uncovering Influences

I Did Not Care For Them – Yolanda has been pushing me to look at this problem for awhile now.  Here’s a quotation from the book of Jeremiah.  It’s the longest Old Testament quotation in the New Testament.  The author of Hebrews is trying to explain the nature of the new covenant.  To do so, he reaches back to the only Old Testament passage that clearly articulates the new covenant, found in Jeremiah 31.  But, when you go read the passage that this author is quoting, you’ll find something unsettling.  It doesn’t say the same thing.  So, how can the inspired author of Hebrews quote from the inspired prophet Jeremiah and not have the same words?  The answer reveals something about translations that we don’t typically have explained to us.  It’s the influence of the Septuagint (LXX).

If you read this phrase in Greek, you would see kego emelesa auton (I did not care for them).  This reading comes from the LXX, not the Hebrew Masoretic text.  In the Hebrew Scriptures, the untranslated Hebrew text reads, “although I was a husband to them.”  Now you see why this passage in Hebrews doesn’t look like the same passage in Jeremiah.  The author of Hebrews quoted the LXX, not the MT. 

That’s the technical explanation, but it really doesn’t solve the deeper theological problem.  Knowing how this passage ended up in the letter to the Hebrews doesn’t help us understand why the author of Hebrews would quote from a Greek translation of the Hebrew Scripture, especially when it looks like the two texts don’t say the same thing.  To answer that one, we have to dig a little deeper.

The Septuagint was the authorized translation of the Hebrew Scriptures into Greek.  It was accomplished by many rabbis and was consider by many to have the same standing for religious purposes as the original Hebrew text.  It was used extensively throughout the Roman Empire wherever Jewish proselytes read the Old Testament.  In fact, nearly every New Testament author makes use of this Greek translation at some point or another.  But (and this is important), no Hebrew New Testament author would ever suggest that the LXX replaced the original Hebrew text.  They just used it because many of their readers were familiar with the Old Testament in its Greek translation

With that in mind, the reading of the LXX must always be interpreted through the original Hebrew text.  This passage is a prime example.  When we read “did not care for them,” we apply our contemporary cultural understanding of this phrase.  That makes us think that the verse says that God didn’t care about the disobedient Israelites.  In other words, we read this as though it is an expression of emotion (e.g. “I don’t like you.  I don’t care about you.”).  But once we see the original Hebrew, we realize that this is not an expression about emotional feelings.  It’s an expression about the status of relationships.  “I do not care for” means “I no longer have a relationship of protection and provision.”  And that is what is implied in the Hebrew statement about Israel rejecting God as the husband. 

What do we learn?  First, we discover that the New Testament use of the Old Testament is often influenced by the intervening Septuagint.  Second, we realize that if we are going to understand the meaning behind passages quoted in the New Testament, we must still go back to the Hebrew original.  And finally, we see that New Testament authors often used  commonly acknowledged sources that we are no longer familiar with.  They do not deliberately misquote (at least not in this case).  They just use what their readers would have at hand.  In a time when books were very rare, very expensive and treasured, they quoted what would be available in a local synagogue.  But if we want to know the meaning, we have to go back to the original and not rely on the intermediate text.

Now you get to go read your New Testament citations with the Hebrew Scriptures opened to the same page.  Have fun.

Topical Index:  Septuagint, LXX, Greek translation, kego emelesa auton

Subscribe
Notify of
8 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Gene Lofaro

Some of this is a little beyond me, Skip.

John McLean

The Septuagint or simply “LXX”, is the Koine Greek version of the Hebrew Bible, translated in stages between the 3rd and 1st centuries BC in Alexandria. It is the oldest of several ancient translations of the Hebrew Bible into the Greek language, the lingua franca of the eastern Mediterranean Basin from the time of Alexander the Great (356-323 BC). The word septuaginta[2] means “seventy” in Latin and derives from a tradition that seventy (or seventy-two) Jewish scholars translated the Pentateuch (Torah) from Hebrew into Greek for Ptolemy II Philadelphus, 285–246 BC.

John McLean

Cyndee
Thanks for sharing this yesterday, “I suppose that is how the world sees it, but God has a law of increase that multiplies our love to produce the results that He wants–in the end!”.

This thought of God multiplying my pitiful efforts, frees me to continue to do my best. Even though I know my best doesn’t measure up to my earthly mentors standards and certainly not God’s standards. It’s so awesome to visualize God amplifying a thought or a prayer or a good work to produce the results he has prepared in advance for us to do. ( Ephesians 2:10 ) It makes it easier to understand how God can use me.

carl roberts

<<>>

It has been said many times, and I also believe rightly so, the best commentary on our Bible is the Bible. The Word of G-d illuminated and brought to Life by the Spirit of G-d. Brother Skip is right, our Bible is one book. It is in it’s entirety, the written Word, revealed to us by the Living Word. Remember the words of Yeshua- “it is written?” The (same) words spoken (by who?) in the “new covenant” of the Lamb’s Book of Life but were also “once delivered to the saints” in the “old.”
The LORD our G-d is one. One LORD, one faith, one baptism, One Spirit, one body and one book, and one covenant. And we are (all) now His through the blood of the everlasting Covenant. Messiah is the Revealer, the Redeemer and the Reconciler.
Our response to His spoken and written words must be the same as our (earthly) father’s. We (His people) are to “continue in my covenant”.. We must (today) remember and respond to His covenant words.

Yeshua/Messiah: “If you abide in me, and my (covenant) words abide in you”

and what’s in it for us?? (the same as our forefathers).. His protection, His provision, His presence.

CYndee

Oh how important it is that we dig deeper and return to the original text for an accurate understanding of God’s ways. Thanks for pointing out that this was a RELATIONAL description of Israel forsaking their covenant with God, and NOT God “getting EMOTIONALLY upset” at His disobedient children. God is NOT childish in His dealings with us. He is good ALL the time, though we may not view circumstances as “good” if I think life is “all about me.” It’s not–and THAT is good news!

Drew

Just a thought regarding prophecies of the B’rit Chadasha within the TANAKH.

Does Moshe not clearly prophesy Israel’s unfaithfulness? Does he also not clearly prophecy the gift of Ruah haKodesh. (See Deut reference below) … Is Moshe’s commentary to Israel not a clear indication of the renewed covenant …. the covenant in full …. the covenant Israel can not mess up?

Moshe points to circumcision of the heart … or an indwelling of The Lord’s Spirit. Moshe ties this circumcision of the heart to life. Moshe then tells Israel that One “like him” will come and that life or death will be the result of listening (or not) to HIM. There is no doubt Moshe spoke about Mashiach Yeshua and to the baptism of fire He would deliver!

The foreshadows of the B’rit Chadasha are all over the Tanakh and I thought maybe high-lighting this overt reference would augment Skip’s point. Israel may at points in time be wayward and down … but The Lord will never eliminate His remnant …. if only for the glory of HIS Holy Name!

The Reference:
Deut: 30,4 If any of thine that are dispersed be in the uttermost parts of heaven, from thence will the LORD thy God gather thee, and from thence will He fetch thee. 30,5 And the LORD thy God will bring thee into the land which thy fathers possessed, and thou shalt possess it; and He will do thee good, and multiply thee above thy fathers. 30,6 And the LORD thy God will circumcise thy heart, and the heart of thy seed, to love the LORD thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, that thou mayest live.

Pat Sullivan

Once again, an amazing piece of information and insight. I almost don’t want to read my Bible anymore cause I am just not sure I can trust what it says. Nuance is SOOO important in communication and nuances of things like this is amazing. What a picture of the “Old Testament GOD” the translators have created. No wonder there are so many who reject Him. The picture they get from Christians and the NT is just so off.