ما قال الاباء عن السبعينية وهل هذا مبالغة

الرجوع إلى لائحة المقالات الرجوع إلى ما قال الاباء عن السبعينية وهل هذا مبالغة

ما قال الاباء عن السبعينية وهل هذا مبالغة ؟

Holy_bible_1

ساعرض في هذا الملف ما قاله بعض الاباء عن السبعينية وهل بالغوا في كلامهم ام لا وفي نهاية الملف ساعرض نص كلامهم كاملا بالانجليزي كما وضعه علماء الابائيات

ولكن في البداية اعرض ما قاله المشكك

الحقيقة يبدأ المشكك ببداية غير امينة فهو يوهم بان الترجمه السبعينية غير مهمة مثلها مثل بقية الترجمات ولكن المسيحيين صنعوا منها اسطوره وهذا خطأ في شيئين

الاول السبعينية هي ليست ترجمه غير مهمة فهي غاية في الاهمية وهذا لعدة اسباب

1 اقدم ترجمه للعهد القديم توضح ليس فقط نص العهد القديم وتشهد علي اصالته بل ايضا توضح المفهوم اليهودي في شرحهم بعض الاعداد عن طريق بعض الاضافات التفسيرية الهامة لفهم الفكر اليهودي قبل الميلاد

2 هي اقدم ترجمة علي الاطلاق في تاريخ البشرية لعمل ضخم مثل العهد القديم فهي ليست هامه فقط للمسيحيين بل هامة للثقافة البشرية كلها لانها مرحلة من مراحل التاريخ البشري وبخاصه علم الترجمه الذي لم يكن نشأ بعد

3 هي ترجمه اعتمد عليها كل اليهود قبل الميلاد وايضا قل انتشار الايمان المسيحي

4 هي ترجمه اعتمد عليها مع النص العبري الاصلي كل كتبة اسفار العهد الجديد

5 هي ترجمه اقتبس منها الرب يسوع المسيح نفسه , بالطبع مع اقتباسه من النص العبري الاصلي

6 هي ترجمه استخدمها الاباء في كل مكان بالبشارة بمسيح النبوات ليهود الشتات مؤكدين ان يسوع هو المسيح

7 هي ترجمه دار حولها صراع طويل بين اليهود والمسيحيين في نهاية القرن الاول الميلادي والثاني وما بعده وهي حقبه تاريخيه لايمكن يتجاهلها اي باحث

وغيرها الكثير من الامور الهامة التي تدور حول السبعينية . ولهذا فمن ياتي بعد ذلك ويقول " ما كانت الترجمه السبعينية لتاخذ اي اهمية بحثية " فهو يكشف انه اصلا ليس باحث محقق ولكن ملفق

ونبذه مختصره عن القديس ارينيؤس

Saint Irenaeus

نشأته:

كلمة "إيرينيؤس" Εἰρηναῖος تعني "المسالم"، وجاء اسمه مطابقًا لشخصيته كمحب للسلام الكنسي على مستوى جامعي. قيل إنه ولد حوالي عام 115 على مقربة من شاطئ آسيا الصغرى القديمة، وكما قال بنفسه إنه كان صبيًا اعتاد أن يحضر عظات القديس بوليكربس الشهيد أحد تلاميذ الرسل أنفسهم، لذا يُرجع إنه ولد بسميرنا (أزمير).

سيامته قسًا:

تتلمذ قديسنا على يدي القديس بوليكربس وأحبه جدًا، إذ كان معه في لحظات استشهاده بروما، يقول إنه يذكر القديس بوليكربس وكلماته وتعاليمه بدقة أكثر من أي حدث مرّ به في حياته. كان إيرينيؤس محبًا للتعلم، وصفه العلامة ترتليان بأنه شغوف نحو كل أنواع المعرفة، لذا أحبه معلمه بوليكربس، الذي قيل إنه أخذه معه إلى روما، ومن هناك بعثه إلى ليون Lyons (بفرنسا) ليقوم بعمل إنجيلي كرازي، إذ كانت العلاقات وثيقة جدًا بين مواني آسيا الصغرى ومنطقة الغال (فرنسا)، ليس فقط من الجوانب التجارية، وإنما أيضًا كان كثير من الكهنة والكارزين يقدُمون إلى الغال من آسيا الصغرى. على أي الأحوال وجد القديس فوتينوس أوباثينوس Pathinus أسقف ليون الشرقي الأصل، الذي كان يبلغ التسعين من عمره في هذا الشاب غيرة متقدة للكرازة، خاصة بين الوثنين فسامه قسًا. في روما كان الكاهن إيرينيؤس محبًا للسلام بصورة عجيبة، لذا كلفه رؤساء كنيسة ليون بالتوجه إلى الأسقف إلوتاريوس Eleutherius بروما، من أجل مشكلة الموناتيين الذين يدعون النبوة، إذ كان يشتاق الكاهن إلى مصالحتهم مع الكنيسة في كل موضع خلال الحب، لكن ليس على حساب العقيدة أو الحق. (ستجد المزيد عن هؤلاء القديسين هنا في موقع الأنبا تكلا في أقسام السير والسنكسار والتاريخ وأقوال الآباء). في ذلك الحين اشتدت موجة الاضطهاد بليون عام 177م، وقبض على عدد كبير من رجال الكتاب هناك، حيث تنيح الأسقف القديس فوتينوس في السجن واستشهد أكثر من 40 شخصًا، فأسرع إيرينيؤس بالعودة إلى ليون ليشدد الأيادي ويسند الكل وسط الضيق، فسيم أسقفًا على ليون وفينا وبعض الإيبارشيات الصغيرة في جنوب بلاد الغال. جهاده الأسقفي في أبوّة صادقة إذ كان القديس إيرينيؤس قد درس اليونانية والشعر اليوناني والفلسفة، لكنه كان يتحدث مع شعبه باللسان السلتي Celtic، حتى يشعروا أنه واحد منهم، وليس غريبًا عنهم. في اتساع قلبه كرز بمحبة خارج نطاق إيبارشيته، وأرسل قديسين كثيرين للكرازة بين الوثنين، مثل فيلكس وفرتوناتوس وأخيلاوس إلى Valence ، وفريتيوس وفيرولس إلى Beasancon. كان محبًا للكنيسة الجامعة بكل قلبه، فعندما سمع أن الأب فيكتور أسقف روما قطع العلاقة بين روما وآسيا الصغرى بسبب خلاف حول عيد القيامة، بعث رسالة إلى أسقف روما بأسلوب لائق لكن شديد، يطالبه ألا يأخذ هذا الموقف العنيف وأن يُعيِّد العلاقات من جديد.

من جهة إيمان الكتاب فقد أظهر غيرة صادقة على الحفاظ على الإيمان المستقيم، مقاومًا الهرطقات خاصة الغنوسية والمونتانية، لكنه في المقاومة لا يبغي الجدل في ذاته، بل كان يركز على إبراز أركان التعليم الرسولي في شتّى القضايا التي أثارها الهراطقة، فكان جدله إيجابيًا بنّاًء. كان مجاهدًا لا في مقاومة الهرطقات فحسب، وإنما بالأحرى في ردّ الهراطقة إلى حضن الكنيسة. لذا كان يتحدث بحكمة بناءّة، في أسلوب هادئ وتسلسل مقنع بروح المحبة غير المتعصبة ولا الجارحة.

نياحته:

شهد خراب ليون عام 197م، إذ رقد حوالي عام 202م، ويري القديس جيروم أنه استشهد، وتُعيّد له الكنيسة اليونانية في 23 أغسطس واللاتينية في 28 يونيو، وقد نقل عيده منذ سنة 1960م إلى 3 يوليو.

فكلامه عن السبعينية هو كلام معلمه بوليكاربوس وهو كلام معلم بوليكابوس وهو يوحنا الحبيب

والقديس ارينيؤس هو اب رائع في تعاليمه وايضا دفاعياته ولكن هو ايضا غير معصوم لو بالغ او لو اخطأ في تعبير فلا عصمه لاشخاص الا للرب فقط ولا عصمة لكتابه الا الكتاب المقدس فقط

وحتي السبعينية رغم روعتها واهميتها كما وضحت سابقا فهي ايضا ترجمه للاصل العبري وهو الاصل الذي وحيه معصوم من الخطأ

ويقول المشكك

بغض النظر عن بداية تعليق المشكك ولكن ما الخطأ في كلام القديس ارينيؤس ؟

وما هو الاسطورة في كلامه ؟

ولكن امر يحتاج الي توضيح . الاختبار الذي قام به صعب ان يكون نفذه علي كل اسفار العهد القديم لان سبعين مترجم كل منهم يترجم اسفار العهد القديم في 70 يوم هذا امر صعب جدا وغالبا هو امرهم بترجمة مقاطع كاختبار وعندما قارنوا هذه المقاطع اعلن الرب صدقهم في الترجمه بانهم كان نفس الكلمات ولكن هذا الامر مستبعد بالنسبه لي ان يكون تم علي كل الاسفار لان هذا بالطبع سيستغرق اكثر من سنه وليس سبعين يوم فقط ليترجم شخص العهد القديم كله من عبري الي يوناني

الامر الاخر القديس ارينيؤس نفسه ينقل لنا تلقيد امر ترجمة اشعياء النبي 7: 14 ويتكلم ان روح الرب الذي اوحي الي اشعياء هو الذي قاد المترجم لدقة ترجمة كلمة عذراء

ونعلم جيدا قصة مترجم هذا العدد الذي نقله لنا التقليد انه احد الشيوخ فقط وليس السبعين شيخ كلهم لان كل شيخ كان مسؤل عن ترجمة جزء من السبعينية ليتموها في سبعين يوم لان السبعينيه بالفعل من يدرسها يجد ان كل مترجم لجزء اختلف اسلوبه عن الاخر وتميل الي الاسلوب التفسيري الي الامم الذين لن يفهموا التقليد اليهودي

فالهالة القدسيه التي وصفت بها السبعينيه غير دقيقه فبعد اختلاف المسيحيين مع اليهود في القرن الثاني الميلادي لان المسيحيين كانوا يستطيعوا وبكل قوه اثبات ان يسوع هو المسيح باثبات تحقيق النبوات المكتوبه في يسوع ولم يستطيع اليهود ان يردوا عليهم ووصلوا الي حل وهو رفض الترجمه السبعينيه اليونانيه والرجوع الي نسخة عزرا العبرية لان معظم المسيحيين لن يستطيعوا ان يجادلوا اليهود بالعبري لان اللغه السائدة هي اليوناني ولهذا اوصي العلامه اوريجانوس لتلاميذه في مدرسه الاسكندريه ان يناقشوا اليهود بالعبري لانه لو استشهدوا بالسبعينيه اليونانيه اليهود سيجاوبوا بانها مرفوضه

وبعد هذا الامر بدا اليهود يقللوا من قيمه السبعينيه جدا ويرفضوها بشده ولكن بعض المسيحيين بدا يغالي من قيمة السبعينيه واخذ من اقوال الاباء واضاف عليها اكثر

فهي ترجمه هامه جدا بالفعل وعمل الروح القدس للمترجمين ظاهر ولكن ليسوا معصومين والاصل هو النص العبري فلا يقلل احد من قيمة السبعينية ولا يغالي ايضا في قيمتها بطريقة اسطورية

ويكمل مترجما كلام القديس ارينيؤس

وايضا ما هو الاسطوري في ذلك ؟ كلامه صحيح ودقيق حتي الان

وهنا يضيف الينا القديس ارينيؤس امر خطير وهام جدا وهو

هنا القديس ارينيؤس يوضح ان الترجمه السبعينية هي ترجمه تفسيرية فهو يقول نصا : كما فسرها الشيوخ السبعون " فهي ليست ترجمه حرفية ولكن تفسيرية وهذا التفسير ارشدهم اليه روح الله القدوس

مع ملاحظة شيئ اخر وهو في ملف اقتباسات العهد الجديد من العهد القديم ووضعت به 491 اقتباس وقسمته فئات ومنه

وكما ذكرت سابقا اني قسمت الاقتباسات عدة فئات

فئة 1 هي ان النص العبري يتفق مع السبعينية ويتفق مع العهد الجديد لفظا

1ا لو هناك اتفاق في العبري والسبعينية مع وجود اختلاف بسيط جدا مع العهد الجديد لا يوثر علي المعني

فئة 2 هي النص العهد الجديد تقرب الي العبري اكثر من السبعينية

2ا لو الاختلاف في حرف او كلمة او تصريف بدون اختلاف في المعني بين العهد الجديد والعبري

2 ب لو الاختلاف في كلمة او مقطع او تصريف مع اختلاف في المعني

فئة 3 هي النص العهد الجديد يقترب من السبعينية اكثر من العبري

3ا لو الاختلاف في كلمه بدون اختلاف المعني

3ب لو الاختلاف في كلمة او اكثر مع اختلاف في المعني

فئة 4 هي النص العبري يتفق مع السبعينية والعهد الجديد يختلف عنهما في مقطع او كلمة مهمة او ترتيب مؤثر او عدة ضمائر او اختصار

4ا لو هناك اختلاف بسيط بين العبري والسبعينية في كلمه ولكن لايوجد اختلاف في المعني ولكن اختلافهم مع العهد الجديد اكثر من كلمة او الترتيب

فئة 5 وهو العبري يختلف قليلا عن السبعينية والاثنين يختلفوا قليلا عن العهد الجديد ولكن نفس المعني

فئة 6 لو العبري يتطابق مع السبعينية تقريبا ولكن العهد الجديد ياخذ المضمون وليس الحرف ( ويشترط وضوح انه اقتباس )

6ا لو العبري يختلف قليلا عن السبعينية والعهد الجديد يقدم مضمون العبري

6ب لو العبري يختلف قليلا عن السبعينية والعهد الجديد يقدم مضمون السبعينية


اجمالي الاقتباسات	491
فئة 1	228
فئة 2	89
فئة 3	29
فئة 4	65
فئة 5	47
فئة 6	33

[Warning: Linked object ignored]

وفقط مقارنه بين الاقتباسات التي هي من العبري مع التي من السبعينية

[Warning: Linked object ignored]

وهي بنسبة 24.8 % للسبعينية الي 75.2 % للعبري

فعندما يكون 25% من اقتباسات كتاب العهد الجديد من السبعينية فلا ياتي احد ويقول انها غير هامة

واخيرا اضع نص كلام القديس ارينيؤس ( كامل ) وغيره من الاباء عن السبعينية

Chapter XXI.—A vindication of the prophecy in Isa. vii. 14 against the misinterpretations of Theodotion, Aquila, the Ebionites, and the Jews. Authority of the Septuagint version. Arguments in proof that Christ was born of a virgin.

1. God, then, was made man, and the Lord did Himself save us, giving us the token of the Virgin. But not as some allege, among those now presuming to expound the Scripture, [thus:] “Behold, a young woman shall conceive, and bring forth a son,”3708 as Theodotion the Ephesian has interpreted, and Aquila of Pontus,3709 both Jewish proselytes. The Ebionites, following these, assert that He was begotten by Joseph; thus destroying, as far as in them lies, such a marvellous dispensation of God, and setting aside the testimony of the prophets which proceeded from God. For truly this prediction was uttered before the removal of the people to Babylon; that is, anterior to the supremacy acquired by the Medes and Persians. But it was interpreted into Greek by the Jews themselves, much before the period of our Lord’s advent, that there might remain no suspicion that perchance the Jews, complying with our humour, did put this interpretation upon these words. They indeed, had they been cognizant of our future existence, and that we should use these proofs from the Scriptures, would themselves never have hesitated to burn their own Scriptures, which do declare that all other nations partake of [eternal] life, and show that they who boast themselves as being the house of Jacob and the people of Israel, are disinherited from the grace of God.

2. For before the Romans possessed their kingdom,3710 while as yet the Macedonians held Asia, Ptolemy the son of Lagus, being anxious to adorn the library which he had founded in Alexandria, with a collection of the writings of all men, which were [works] of merit, made request to the people of Jerusalem, that they should have their Scriptures translated into the Greek language. And they—for at that time they were still subject to the Macedonians—sent to Ptolemy seventy of their elders, who were thoroughly skilled in the Scriptures and in both the languages, to carry out what he had desired.3711 But he, wishing to test them individually, and fearing lest they might perchance, by taking counsel together, conceal the truth in the Scriptures, by their interpretation, separated them from each other, and commanded them all to write the same translation. He did this with respect to all the books. But when they came together in the same place before Ptolemy, and each of them compared his own interpretation with that of every other, God was indeed glorified, and the Scriptures were acknowledged as truly divine. For all of them read out the common translation [which they had prepared] in the very same words and the very same names, from beginning to end, so that even the Gentiles present perceived that the Scriptures had been interpreted by the inspiration of God.3712And there was nothing astonishing in God having done this,—He who, when, during the captivity of the people under Nebuchadnezzar, the Scriptures had been corrupted, and when, after seventy years, the Jews had returned to their own land, then, in the times of Artaxerxes king of the Persians, inspired Esdras the priest, of the tribe of Levi, to recast3713 all the words of the former prophets, and to re-establish with the people the Mosaic legislation.

3. Since, therefore, the Scriptures have been interpreted with such fidelity, and by the grace of God, and since from these God has prepared and formed again our faith towards His Son, and has preserved to us the unadulterated Scriptures in Egypt, where the house of Jacob flourished, fleeing from the famine in Canaan; where also our Lord was preserved when He fled from the persecution set on foot by Herod; and [since] this interpretation of these Scriptures was made prior to our Lord’s descent [to earth], and came into being before the Christians appeared —for our Lord was born about the forty-first year of the reign of Augustus; but Ptolemy was much earlier, under whom the Scriptures were interpreted;—[since these things are so, I say,] truly these men are proved to be impudent and presumptuous, who would now show a desire to make different translations, when we refute them out of these Scriptures, and shut them up to a belief in the advent of the Son of God. But our faith is stedfast, unfeigned, and the only true one, having clear proof from these Scriptures, which were interpreted in the way I have related; and the preaching of the Church is without interpolation. For the apostles, since they are of more ancient date than all these [heretics], agree with this aforesaid translation; and the translation harmonizes with the tradition of the apostles. For Peter, and John, and Matthew, and Paul, and the rest successively, as well as their followers, did set forth all prophetical [announcements], just as3714 the interpretation of the elders contains them.

4. For the one and the same Spirit of God, who proclaimed by the prophets what and of what sort the advent of the Lord should be, did by these elders give a just interpretation of what had been truly prophesied; and He did Himself, by the apostles, announce that the fulness of the times of the adoption had arrived, that the kingdom of heaven had drawn nigh, and that He was dwelling within those that believe on Him who was born Emmanuel of the Virgin. To this effect they testify, [saying,] that before Joseph had come together with Mary, while she therefore remained in virginity, “she was found with child of the Holy Ghost;”3715 and that the angel Gabriel said unto her, “The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee; therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God;”3716 and that the angel said to Joseph in a dream, “Now this was done, that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by Isaiah the prophet, Behold, a virgin shall be with child.”3717 But the elders have thus interpreted what Esaias said: “And the Lord, moreover, said unto Ahaz, Ask for thyself a sign from the Lord thy God out of the depth below, or from the height above. And Ahaz said, I will not ask, and I will not tempt the Lord. And he said, It is not a small thing3718 for you to weary men; and how does the Lord weary them? Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign; Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son; and ye shall call His name Emmanuel. Butter and honey shall He eat: before He knows or chooses out things that are evil, He shall exchange them for what is good; for before the child knows good or evil, He shall not consent to evil, that He may choose that which is good.”3719 Carefully, then, has the Holy Ghost pointed out, by what has been said, His birth from a virgin, and His essence, that He is God (for the name Emmanuel indicates this). And He shows that He is a man, when He says, “Butter and honey shall He eat;” and in that He terms Him a child also, [in saying,] “before He knows good and evil;” for these are all the tokens of a human infant. But that He “will not consent to evil, that He may choose that which is good,”—this is proper to God; that by the fact, that He shall eat butter and honey, we should not understand that He is a mere man only, nor, on the other hand, from the name Emmanuel, should suspect Him to be God without flesh.

5. And when He says, “Hear, O house of David,”3720 He performed the part of one indicating that He whom God promised David that He would raise up from the fruit of his belly (ventris) an eternal King, is the same who was born of the Virgin, herself of the lineage of David. For on this account also, He promised that the King should be “of the fruit of his belly,” which was the appropriate [term to use with respect] to a virgin conceiving, and not “of the fruit of his loins,” nor “of the fruit of his reins,” which expression is appropriate to a generating man, and a woman conceiving by a man. In this promise, therefore, the Scripture excluded all virile influence; yet it certainly is not mentioned that He who was born was not from the will of man. But it has fixed and established “the fruit of the belly,” that it might declare the generation of Him who should be [born] from the Virgin, as Elisabeth testified when filled with the Holy Ghost, saying to Mary, “Blessed art thou among women, and blessed is the fruit of thy belly;”3721 the Holy Ghost pointing out to those willing to hear, that the promise which God had made, of raising up a King from the fruit of [David’s] belly, was fulfilled in the birth from the Virgin, that is, from Mary. Let those, therefore, who alter the passage of Isaiah thus, “Behold, a young woman shall conceive,” and who will have Him to be Joseph’s son, also alter the form of the promise which was given to David, when God promised him to raise up, from the fruit of his belly, the horn of Christ the King. But they did not understand, otherwise they would have presumed to alter even this passage also.

6. But what Isaiah said, “From the height above, or from the depth beneath,”3722 was meant to indicate, that “He who descended was the same also who ascended.”3723 But in this that he said, “The Lord Himself shall give you a sign,” he declared an unlooked-for thing with regard to His generation, which could have been accomplished in no other way than by God the Lord of all, God Himself giving a sign in the house of David. For what great thing or what sign should have been in this, that a young woman conceiving by a man should bring forth,—a thing which happens to all women that produce offspring? But since an unlooked-for salvation was to be provided for men through the help of God, so also was the unlooked-for birth from a virgin accomplished; God giving this sign, but man not working it out.

7. On this account also, Daniel,3724 foreseeing His advent, said that a stone, cut out without hands, came into this world. For this is what “without hands” means, that His coming into this world was not by the operation of human hands, that is, of those men who are accustomed to stone-cutting; that is, Joseph taking no part with regard to it, but Mary alone co-operating with the pre-arranged plan. For this stone from the earth derives existence from both the power and the wisdom of God. Wherefore also Isaiah says: “Thus saith the Lord, Behold, I deposit in the foundations of Zion a stone, precious, elect, the chief, the corner-one, to be had in honour.”3725 So, then, we understand that His advent in human nature was not by the will of a man, but by the will of God.

8. Wherefore also Moses giving a type, cast his rod upon the earth,3726 in order that it, by becoming flesh, might expose and swallow up all the opposition of the Egyptians, which was lifting itself up against the pre-arranged plan of God;3727 that the Egyptians themselves might testify that it is the finger of God which works salvation for the people, and not the son of Joseph. For if He were the son of Joseph, how could He be greater than Solomon, or greater than Jonah,3728 or greater than David,3729 when He was generated from the same seed, and was a descendant of these men? And how was it that He also pronounced Peter blessed, because he acknowledged Him to be the Son of the living God?3730

9. But besides, if indeed He had been the son of Joseph, He could not, according to Jeremiah, be either king or heir. For Joseph is shown to be the son of Joachim and Jechoniah, as also Matthew sets forth in his pedigree.3731 But Jechoniah, and all his posterity, were disinherited from the kingdom; Jeremiah thus declaring, “As I live, saith the Lord, if Jechoniah the son of Joachim king of Judah had been made the signet of my right hand, I would pluck him thence, and deliver him into the hand of those seeking thy life.”3732 And again: “Jechoniah is dishonoured as a useless vessel, for he has been cast into a land which he knew not. Earth, hear the word of the Lord: Write this man a disinherited person; for none of his seed, sitting on the throne of David, shall prosper, or be a prince in Judah.”3733 And again, God speaks of Joachim his father: “Therefore thus saith the Lord concerning Joachim his father, king of Judea, There shall be from him none sitting upon the throne of David: and his dead body shall be cast out in the heat of day, and in the frost of night. And I will look upon him, and upon his sons, and will bring upon them, and upon the inhabitants of Jerusalem, upon the land of Judah, all the evils that I have pronounced against them.”3734 Those, therefore, who say that He was begotten of Joseph, and that they have hope in Him, do cause themselves to be disinherited from the kingdom, failing under the curse and rebuke directed against Jechoniah and his seed. Because for this reason have these things been spoken concerning Jechoniah, the [Holy] Spirit foreknowing the doctrines of the evil teachers; that they may learn that from his seed—that is, from Joseph—He was not to be born but that, according to the promise of God, from David’s belly the King eternal is raised up, who sums up all things in Himself, and has gathered into Himself the ancient formation [of man].3735

10. For as by one man’s disobedience sin entered, and death obtained [a place] through sin; so also by the obedience of one man, righteousness having been introduced, shall cause life to fructify in those persons who in times past were dead.3736 And as the protoplast himself Adam, had his substance from untilled and as yet virgin soil (“for God had not yet sent rain, and man had not tilled the ground”3737 ), and was formed by the hand of God, that is, by the Word of God, for “all things were made by Him,”3738 and the Lord took dust from the earth and formed man; so did He who is the Word, recapitulating Adam in Himself, rightly receive a birth, enabling Him to gather up Adam [into Himself], from Mary, who was as yet a virgin. If, then, the first Adam had a man for his father, and was born of human seed, it were reasonable to say that the second Adam was begotten of Joseph. But if the former was taken from the dust, and God was his Maker, it was incumbent that the latter also, making a recapitulation in Himself, should be formed as man by God, to have an analogy with the former as respects His origin. Why, then, did not God again take dust, but wrought so that the formation should be made of Mary? It was that there might not be another formation called into being, nor any other which should [require to] be saved, but that the very same formation should be summed up [in Christ as had existed in Adam], the analogy having been preserved.

اولا يستينوس الشهيد

في حواره مع تريفو اليهودي

And when Ptolemy king of Egypt formed a library, and endeavoured to collect the writings of all men, he heard also of these prophets, and sent to Herod, who was at that time king of the Jews,1826 requesting that the books of the prophets be sent to him. And Herod the king did indeed send them, written, as they were, in the foresaid Hebrew language. And when their contents were found to be unintelligible to the Egyptians, he again sent and requested that men be commissioned to translate them into the Greek language. And when this was done, the books remained with the Egyptians, where they are until now. They are also in the possession of all Jews throughout the world;

وايضا في كلامه عن تاريخ السبعينية

Chapter XIII.—History of the Septuagint.

But if any one says that the writings of Moses and of the rest of the prophets were also written in the Greek character, let him read profane histories, and know that Ptolemy, king of Egypt, when he had built the library in Alexandria, and by gathering books from every quarter had filled it, then learnt that very ancient histories written in Hebrew happened to be carefully preserved; and wishing to know their contents, he sent for seventy wise men from Jerusalem, who were acquainted with both the Greek and Hebrew language, and appointed them to translate the books; and that in freedom from all disturbance they might the more speedily complete the translation, he ordered that there should be constructed, not in the city itself, but seven stadia off (where the Pharos was built), as many little cots as there were translators, so that each by himself might complete his own translation; and enjoined upon those officers who were appointed to this duty, to afford them all attendance, but to prevent communication with one another, in order that the accuracy of the translation might be discernible even by their agreement. And when he ascertained that the seventy men had not only given the same meaning, but had employed the same words, and had failed in agreement with one another not even to the extent of one word; but had written the same things, and concerning the same things, he was struck with amazement, and believed that the translation had been written by divine power, and perceived that the men were worthy of all honour, as beloved of God; and with many gifts ordered them to return to their own country. And having, as was natural, marvelled at the books, and concluded them to be divine, he consecrated them in that library. These things, ye men of Greece, are no fable, nor do we narrate fictions; but we ourselves having been in Alexandria, saw the remains of the little cots at the Pharos still preserved, and having heard these things from the inhabitants, who had received them as part of their country’s tradition,2542 we now tell to you what you can also learn from others, and specially from those wise and esteemed men who have written of these things, Philo and Josephus, and many others. But if any of those who are wont to be forward in contradiction should say that these books do not belong to us, but to the Jews, and should assert that we in vain profess to have learnt our religion froth them, let him know, as he may from those very things which are written in these books, that not to them, but to us, does the doctrine of them refer. That the books relating to our religion are to this day preserved among the Jews, has been a work of Divine Providence on our behalf; for lest, by producing them out of the Church, we should give occasion to those who wish to slander us to charge us with fraud, we demand that they be produced from the synagogue of the Jews, that from the very books still preserved among them it might clearly and evidently appear, that the laws which were written by holy men for instruction pertain to us.

اكليمندوس الاسكندري

Chapter XXII.—On the Greek Translation of the Old Testament.

So much for the details respecting dates, as stated variously by many, and as set down by us.

It is said that the Scriptures both of the law and of the prophets were translated from the dialect of the Hebrews into the Greek language in the reign of Ptolemy the son of Lagos, or, according to others, of Ptolemy surnamed Philadelphus; Demetrius Phalereus bringing to this task the greatest earnestness, and employing painstaking accuracy on the materials for the translation. For the Macedonians being still in possession of Asia, and the king being ambitious of adorning the library he had at Alexandria with all writings, desired the people of Jerusalem to translate the prophecies they possessed into the Greek dialect. And they being the subjects of the Macedonians, selected from those of highest character among them seventy elders, versed in the Scriptures, and skilled in the Greek dialect, and sent them to him with the divine books. And each having severally translated each prophetic book, and all the translations being compared together, they agreed both in meaning and expression. For it was the counsel of God carried out for the benefit of Grecian ears. It was not alien to the inspiration of God, who gave the prophecy, also to produce the translation, and make it as it were Greek prophecy. Since the Scriptures having perished in the captivity of Nabuchodonosor, Esdras2096 the Levite, the priest, in the time of Artaxerxes king of the Persians, having become inspired in the exercise of prophecy restored again the whole of the ancient Scriptures. And Aristobulus, in his first book addressed to Philometor, writes in these words: “And Plato followed the laws given to us, and had manifestly studied all that is said in them.” And before Demetrius there had been translated by another, previous to the dominion of Alexander and of the Persians, the account of the departure of our countrymen the Hebrews from Egypt, and the fame of all that happened to them, and their taking possession of the land, and the account of the whole code of laws; so that it is perfectly clear that the above-mentioned philosopher derived a great deal from this source, for he was very learned, as also Pythagoras, who transferred many things from our books to his own system of doctrines. And Numenius, the Pythagorean philosopher, expressly writes: “For what is Plato, but Moses speaking in Attic Greek?” This Moses was a theologian and prophet, and as some say, an interpreter of sacred laws. His family, his deeds, and life, are related by the Scriptures themselves, which are worthy of all credit; but have nevertheless to be stated by us also as well as we can.2097

ترتليان

Chapter XVIII.

But, that we might attain an ampler and more authoritative knowledge at once of Himself, and of His counsels and will, God has added a written revelation for the behoof of every one whose heart is set on seeking Him, that seeking he may find, and finding believe, and believing obey. For from the first He sent messengers into the world,—men whose stainless righteousness made them worthy to know the Most High, and to reveal Him,—men abundantly endowed with the Holy Spirit, that they might proclaim that there is one God only who made all things, who formed man from the dust of the ground (for He is the true Prometheus who gave order to the world by arranging the seasons and their course),—these have further set before us the proofs He has given of His majesty in His judgments by floods and fires, the rules appointed by Him for securing His favour, as well as the retribution in store for the ignoring, forsaking and keeping them, as being about at the end of all to adjudge His worshippers to everlasting life, and the wicked to the doom of fire at once without ending and without break, raising up again all the dead from the beginning, reforming and renewing them with the object of awarding either recompense. Once these things were with us, too, the theme of ridicule. We are of your stock and nature: men are made, not born, Christians. The preachers of whom we have spoken are called prophets, from the office which belongs to them of predicting the future. Their words, as well as the miracles which they performed, that men might have faith in their divine authority, we have still in the literary treasures they have left, and which are open to all. Ptolemy, surnamed Philadelphus, the most learned of his race, a man of vast acquaintance with all literature, emulating, I imagine, the book enthusiasm of Pisistratus, among other remains of the past which either their antiquity or something of peculiar interest made famous, at the suggestion of Demetrius Phalereus, who was renowned above all grammarians of his time, and to whom he had committed the management of these things, applied to the Jews for their writings—I mean the writings peculiar to them and in their tongue, which they alone possessed, for from themselves, as a people dear to God for their fathers’ sake, their prophets had ever sprung, and to them they had ever spoken. Now in ancient times the people we call Jews bare the name of Hebrews, and so both their writings and their speech were Hebrew. But that the understanding of their books might not be wanting, this also the Jews supplied to Ptolemy; for they gave him seventy-two interpreters—men whom the philosopher Menedemus, the well-known asserter of a Providence, regarded with respect as sharing in his views. The same account is given by Aristæus. So the king left these works unlocked to all, in the Greek language.103 To this day, at the temple of Serapis, the libraries of Ptolemy are to be seen, with the identical Hebrew originals in them. The Jews, too, read them publicly. Under a tribute-liberty, they are in the habit of going to hear them every Sabbath. Whoever gives ear will find God in them; whoever takes pains to understand, will be compelled to believe.

والمجد لله دائما