[Debau]

My limited understanding of the Septuagint is that it is a multi headed monster. Generally speaking, it is referring to an OT translation originating from Alexandria Egypt, supposedly created by 72 scribes of Israel. There does seem to be fragmentary evidence of B.C. Greek translations of the OT. The 5th column of Origen's Hexapla is supposedly a revision of an older (B.C.) Greek translation referred to by textual critics today as the LXX / Septuagint, though there are "several" literary documents referred to as the Septuagint. The LXX has inaccuracies in the ages of the Kings of Israel and Judah, and adds 2000 years to the geneaologies in Genesis. What is at stake here is concept, or words that are inspired. If the Septuagint, with it's glaring inaccuracies and differences from the Masoretic text can be called the word of God, so can all the other perversions. I have not read it, but Floyd Nolan Jones has written an exhaustive critique of the Septuagint. He says it is found to be the two manuscripts Vaticanus and Sinaiticus, and especially true of Vaticanus B. I believe the history of it, its myth, Alexandrian source, and piecemeal construction make it a useful commentary at best.