Another reason why we favour the LXX is because it is not the Masoretic text. This Hebrew text wasn't finalised until the 11th century A.D., so it is much less ancient than the LXX. We believe it to be much more accurate. Moreover, there is quite a lot of evidence to show that the Jewish scholars who edited the Masoretic bible changed many texts so that they could not be used to show that Jesus was the promised Messiah, ie to show that the Old Testament points so often to Jesus! Unfortunately, the Masoretic text has been well loved for many centuries in the West. (For a long time it was assumed that since it was written in Hebrew it must have been more ancient than the Greek LXX.) I am really at a loss to understand why Catholic biblical scholars still put so much emphasis on it. Perhaps it is partly because they have already invested so heavily in studying it that they don't want to upset this apple cart.
OK. But I have a question. We know that the LXX have three main versions:
Codex Vaticanus (4th century)
Codex Sinaiticus (4th century)
Codex Alexandrinus (5th century)
So, wich of them does the orthodox church accept as the canonical
version of the OT (in the Orthodox Bible!)?
and... Is there many differences between this three versions?