At the end of the fourth century, Jerome decided to translate the Old Testament into Latin from the Hebrew manuscripts that were available to him, and not from the "traditional" Greek text. This fact provoked a reaction from Augustine, who considered that the Greek translation of the LXX must be the starting point of every translation, since it had the authority of the apostles. The two great figures of the Latin West engaged in a dialectical battle in which we find clearly delineated the two principles which are in tension and which have determined the reception of the biblical text down to our time: the value of the "original" text (hebraica veritas) and the authority of the text received by the church (Septuaginta auctoritas). In facing this "battle," we are dealing with some very up-to-date questions: Is it possible to speak of a canonical text of the Old Testament? In what language is that text? On what text should our liturgical translations be based? Is there an "original" text of the Bible? Can an ancient version be superior to the text it is translating? What is the value of the LXX?

At the end of the fourth century, Jerome decided to translate the Old Testament into Latin from the Hebrew manuscripts that were available to him, and not from the “traditional” Greek text. This fact provoked a reaction from Augustine, who considered that the Greek translation of the LXX must be the starting point of every translation, since it had the authority of the apostles. The two great figures of the Latin West engaged in a dialectical battle in which we find clearly delineated the two principles which are in tension and which have determined the reception of the biblical text down to our time: the value of the “original” text (hebraica veritas) and the authority of the text received by the church (Septuaginta auctoritas). In facing this “battle,” we are dealing with some very up-to-date questions: Is it possible to speak of a canonical text of the Old Testament? In what language is that text? On what text should our liturgical translations be based? Is there an “original” text of the Bible? Can an ancient version be superior to the text it is translating? What is the value of the LXX?

In this follow-up to Toward a Theology of the Septuagint: Stellenbosch Congress on the Septuagint, 2018 (2020), contributors demonstrate what a theology of the Septuagint should look like. Essays address questions of methodology, and case studies from different books show the relevance and benefits of a theological approach. Examples are drawn from Exodus, Deuteronomy, Proverbs, Job, Tobit, 1 and 2 Maccabees, Hosea, Ezekiel, Daniel, and Ben Sira. Contributors include Nicholas Peter Legh Allen, Bryan Beeckman, Alma Brodersen, Johann Cook, Beate Ego, Karin Finsterbusch, Pierre Jordaan, Wolfgang Kraus, Jean Maurais, Cynthia L. Miller-Naudé, Mogens Müller, Jacobus A. Naudé, Peter Nagel, Larry Perkins, Martin Rösel, Barbara Schmitz, Frank Ueberschaer, Jan Willem van Henten, and Michael van der Meer.

The book deals with the field of decanonization of ancient traditions by the technique of deconstructing their original context; in particular: the process of canonization of the Greek Torah in Jewish-Hellenistic and Christian tradition and its decanonization in Rabbinic literature; the use and abuse of the translation(s) of Aquila in Patristic and Rabbinic literature and the substitution of Aquila by Onkelos in Babylonian academies; the decanonization of the book of Ben Sira in Rabbinic literature. On the basis of his analysis, the author concludes that, if a canon is the ability of a text to produce and authorize commentary deconstructing its original context by generalization, de-canonization is the inverse way of contextualizing a 'canonical' text by reconstructing the supposed original context.

These essays reassess the relationship between the Septuagint and the Hebrew text of the Bible, and shed new light on the literary history and transmission of biblical books between 300 B.C.E. and 100 C.E.

The Septuagint, the Greek translation of the Hebrew Old Testament, was the 'Bible' of the early Christian Church. This is a comprehensive introduction to the issues surrounding the translation and development of the Septuagint. Professor Hengel first traces the history of the Septuagint. He explores the controversial discussion between Jews and Christians regarding its reliability, examining particularly the views of the church fathers relating to its authority, its inspiration, and its canon.

The Christian discovery of the Babylonian Talmud is a significant landmark in the long and complex history of anti-Jewish polemic. While the Talmudic corpus developed in the same period as early Christianity, this post-biblical text was largely unknown to the Christians. Full awareness of the Talmud among Christian authors did not arise until the late 1230s, when the Jewish convert Nicholas Donin presented a Latin translation of Talmudic fragments to Pope Gregory IX. Though the Talmud was subsequently put on trial (1240) and burnt (1241/2) in Paris, the controversy surrounding it continued over the following years, as Pope Innocent IV called for a revision of its condemnation. The textual basis for this revision is the Extractiones de Talmud, that is, a Latin translation of 1.922 Talmudic fragments. The articles in this volume shed new light on this monumental translation and its historical context. They also offer critical editions of related texts, such as Donin’s anti-Talmudic polemic. Authors of the contributions are: Wout van Bekkum, Piero Capelli, Ulisse Cecini, Enric Cortès, Óscar de la Cruz Palma, Federico Dal Bo, Alexander Fidora, Görge K. Hasselhoff, Moisés Orfali, Ursula Ragacs and Eulàlia Vernet i Pons.

In The Institution of the Hasmonean High Priesthood, Vasile Babota offers an interdisciplinary study of the establishment of the Hasmonean priests as high priests in Jerusalem, from their revolt in 167 down to 140. The Hasmonean high priests exercised both religious and civil powers until 37 B.C.E. and some acted also as kings. Previous studies looked at them mainly from a biblical /Jewish perspective. Vasile Babota persuasively argues that the first high priests Jonathan and Simon acted as Hellenistic high priestly rulers. This conclusion is based on an analysis of the activity of the high priests Jonathan and Simon on internal and external levels, a comparison with earlier Jewish high priests, and a comparison with Hellenistic (Seleucid and Ptolemaic) high priests.