In particular, I’m interested in the addition to the end of Psalm 14:3 (LXX 13:3) -
πάντες ἐξέκλιναν ἅμα ἠχρεώθησαν οὐκ ἔστιν ποιῶν χρηστότητα οὐκ ἔστιν ἕως ἑνός τάφος ἀνεῳγμένος ὁ λάρυγξ αὐτῶν, ταῖς γλώσσαις αὐτῶν ἐδολιοῦσαν, ἰὸς ἀσπίδων ὑπὸ τὰ χείλη αὐτῶν, ὧν τὸ στόμα ἀρᾶς καὶ πικρίας γέμει· ὀξεῖς οἱ πόδες αὐτῶν ἐκχέαι αἷμα, σύντριμμα καὶ ταλαιπωρία ἐν ταῖς ὁδοῖς αὐτῶν, καὶ ὁδὸν εἰρήνης οὐκ ἔγνωσαν. οὐκ ἔστιν φόβος θεοῦ ἀπέναντι τῶν ὀφθαλμῶν αὐτῶν
Here you find a match in Romans 3:10-18 -
Οὐκ ἔστιν δίκαιος οὐδὲ εἷς, οὐκ ἔστιν ὁ συνίων, οὐκ ἔστιν ὁ ἐκζητῶν τὸν θεόν· πάντες ἐξέκλιναν, ἅμα ἠχρεώθησαν· οὐκ ἔστιν ποιῶν χρηστότητα, οὐκ ἔστιν ἕως ἑνός. τάφος ἀνεῳγμένος ὁ λάρυγξ αὐτῶν, ταῖς γλώσσαις αὐτῶν ἐδολιοῦσαν, ἰὸς ἀσπίδων ὑπὸ τὰ χείλη αὐτῶν, ὧν τὸ στόμα ἀρᾶς καὶ πικρίας γέμει· ὀξεῖς οἱ πόδες αὐτῶν ἐκχέαι αἷμα, σύντριμμα καὶ ταλαιπωρία ἐν ταῖς ὁδοῖς αὐτῶν, καὶ ὁδὸν εἰρήνης οὐκ ἔγνωσαν. οὐκ ἔστιν φόβος θεοῦ ἀπέναντι τῶν ὀφθαλμῶν αὐτῶν.
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?s ... BLGNT;NASB
A YouTube video came out yesterday analyzing the differences between Psalms 14 and 53, in light of Romans 3:10-18 -
The creator (Brak Bnei) is attempting to use this single example to ‘prove’ a rather extreme conclusion - that Christians conspired on a wide scale to ᾽corrupt᾽ the Septuagint to conform with the New Testament. He further concludes that the assertion that the NT 'quotes from the Septuagint' is 'fallacious', and that, in reality, the Septuagint is actually 'quoting' the NT, by virtue of this conspiracy theory.
I find it ironic that he opens the video by citing Emmanuel Tov’s definition of “The Septuagint,” yet his conclusion basically contradicts Tov’s scholarship vis-à-vis the Septuagint.
There seems to be a hidden premise - that the original, pre-Christian Septuagint must have conformed exactly to the Proto-Masoretic text, prior to its corruption by Christians. The other hidden premise would be that the 'corruptions' originated with the NT authors (such as Paul in Romans 3:10-18), even without a clear motive. Thus any departure from the Masoretic Text by the LXX must be a result of Christian corruption. It’s essentially a conspiracy theory. And this reportedly is the first of a series of videos that will attempt to demonstrate this.
Tov touches on these Psalms in ‘Textual Criticism of the Hebrew Bible’ (pg. 12-15 of the 3rd edition and pg. 188 of the 2nd Revised Edition). He makes a brief note on the LXX version(s) in the 2nd edition. But this seems to have been removed from the 3rd edition, for some reason (or I simply can’t find it). Nor can I find any reference to it in his book ‘The Text-Critical Use of the Septuagint in Biblical Research’.
Here’s what he says in the 2nd edition of his ‘Textual Criticism’ book (pg. 188) - emphasis added:
Can anyone recommend any further reading on this topic? Much obliged.“A comparison of Chronicles with its sources and, likewise, a comparison of the pairs of parallel psalms 2 Samuel 22 / / Psalm 18, Psalm 14 / / Psalm 53, and, like them, other parallel texts (cf. p. 12), points to many scribal differences (for examples see chapter 4C) which were perhaps created at a very early stage, before these units were integrated into the complete compositions now found in 𝕸.
At some stage, the literary growth was necessarily completed. It is possible that at an early stage there existed different early compositions that were parallel or overlapping, but none of these have been preserved (cf., however, p. 178). At a certain point in time the last formulations were accepted as final from the point of view of their content and were transmitted and circulated as such. But sometimes this process recurred. Occasionally a book reached what appeared at the time to be its final form, and as such was circulated. However, at a later stage another, revised, edition was prepared, which was intended to take the place of the preceding one. This new edition was also accepted as authoritative, but the evidence shows that it did not always succeed in completely eradicating the texts of the earlier edition which survived in places which were geographically or socially remote. So it came about that these earlier editions reached the hands of the Greek translators in Egypt and remained among the scrolls at Qumran. This pertains to many of the examples analyzed in chapter 7, especially the shorter text forms described there (pp. 319-336).