So there is no such thing as "the Septuagint". It's a myth.
Ok, so called "LXX" (meaning Seventy, 70 in Roman Numerals, L=50, X=10, X=10), and yet according tot te 'Legend"/"myth" of the "Letter of Aristeas" there were "72" scholars, not "70". No one knows why it is not "LXXII" (72, Seventy-Two) rather than "LXX". They assume, but no substantial evidence is ever provided. Instead it is all subjective.
The so called “Septuagint” [LXX., meaning “Seventy” in Roman numerals (L=50, X=10, so 50+10+10=70)], really being “septuaginta (plural, with differing translations)” of Origen's Hexapla, Theodotion (6th column), Aquila of Sinope, & Symmachus are really from the sources Vaticanus and Sinaiticus (both of which are not anywhere near 4th C.).
“The Septuagint” as we presently know it, appears first in the writings of Origen [Hexapla] at near the end of the 2nd century AD., which is why so many of its OT translations, match near word for word, as they are quoted in the NT by various persons. They simply copied the NT Greek texts back into the OT to make it seem like those speakers were directly quoting those passages, and to give a greater credence to their new translation. Historically, there is an item called the “Letter of Aristeas”, which proposes an ancient Greek translation of the Hebrew texts, but it has demonstrated to be based on an unfounded and mostly discredited “legend” or “myth”, and has serious internal consistency problems (ie. 72, vs 70, &c).
“... Most of these fables focus on an infamous “book” 14 called the “Letter of Aristeas” 15 (hereafter called the Letter) and the alleged claims of the Letter’s documentation by authors who wrote before the first coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and in the first few centuries following His first sojourn on earth. 16 The only extant Letter is dated from the eleventh century. In addition, there is no pre-Christian Greek translation of the He-brew Old Testament text, which the Letter alleges, that has been found, in-cluding the texts among the Dead Sea Scrolls. ...” -
http://www.theoldpathspublications.com/Downloads/Free/The Septuagint ebook.pdf
“... the story of Aristeas appears comparatively rational. Yet it has long been recognized that much of it is unhistorical, in particular the professed date and nationality of the writer. Its claims to authenticity were demolished by Dr. Hody two centuries ago (De bibliorum textibus originalibus, Oxon., 1705) ...” -
The Septuagint, by H. St. J. Thackeray
De bibliorum textibus originalibus -
Humfredi Hodii linguae graecae professoris regii et Archidiaconi Oxon. De bibliorum textibus originalibus, versionibus graecis, & latina vulgata libri 4.. : Humphrey Hody : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive
Other sources, identifying the same -
The Septuagint
“... Roman Catholics use the idea that Christ quoted the Septuagint to justly include the Apocrypha in their Bibles. ... Since no Hebrew Old Testament ever included the books of the Apocrypha, the Septuagint is the only source the Catholics have for justifying their canon. Many Reformers and Lutherans wrote at great length refuting the validity of the Septuagint. ...” -
http://www.wcbible.org/documents/septuagint.pdf
“... [Page 46] Proponents of the invisible LXX will try to claim that Origen didn't translate the Hebrew into Greek, but only copied the LXX into the second column of his Hexapla. Can this argument be correct? No. If it were, then that would mean that those astute 72 Jewish scholars added the Apocryphal books to their work before they were ever written. (!) Or else, Origen took the liberty to add these spurious writings to God's Holy Word (Rev. 22:18). ...
... Is there ANY Greek manuscript of the Old Testament written BEFORE the time of Christ? Yes. There is one minute scrap dated at 150 BC, the Ryland's Papyrus, #458. It contains Deuteronomy chapters 23-28. No more. No less. If fact, it may be the existence of this fragment that led Eucebius and Philo to assume that the entire Pentatuech had been translated by some scribe in an effort to interest Gentiles in the history of the Jews. ... [page 46]
... [Page 47] If there was an Aristeas, he was faced with two insurmountable problems.
First, how did he ever locate the twelve tribes in order to pick his six representative scholars from each. Having been thoroughly scattered by their many defeats and captivities, the tribal lines of the 12 tribes had long since dissolved into virtual non-existence. It was impossible for anyone to distinctly identify the 12 individual tribes.
Secondly, if the 12 tribes had been identified, they would not have undertaken such a translation for two compelling reasons.
(1) Every Jew knew that the official caretaker of Scripture was the tribe of Levi as evidenced in Deuteronomy 17:18, 31:25,26 and Malachi 2:7. Thus, NO Jew of any of the eleven other tribes would dare to join such a forbidden enterprise. ...” - The Answer Book, By Sam Gipp, Page 46-47, selected portions, emphasis [bold] in original. ...
